The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled police don't need a search warrant to look at a cellphone's call list after arresting the phone's owner. As courts around the country grapple with the issue, tell us: is this 'reasonable' search and seizure?
What's the difference between personal information and correspondence you have physically stored in your home, and similar information that's on your cellphone? And what should police have access to without a warrant? It's a question that courts across the nation are dealing with it and one that arose here in Massachusetts on Wednesday, when the Supreme Judicial Court ruled that police don't need a search warrant to look at the call list of a person's cellphone during while searching that person's personal property after an arrest. However, in writing the court's opinion for Commonwealth vs. Demetrius A. Phifer, Justice Margot Botsford cited other court cases that raise questions about the extent that law enforcement officials can access …
LCT
3:43 am on Sunday, January 20, 2013
So the consensus of the posters here don't think it's OK to have warrantless searches? Interesting as I see some of the same people posting here who don't give a fig about my 2nd Amendment rights are now concerned about their 4th Amendment rights. It's evidently OK to pick & choose which Amendment can be trampled? It's all or nothing folks. That's how our government works. Which Amendment shall … more ›