Searching Cellphones

Searching Cellphones

Robert C. Phillips
Deputy District Attorney, Retired
June, 2014

            Barely three years ago, the California Supreme Court held in People v. Diaz (2011) 51 Cal.4th 84, that a cellphone recovered from the person of an arrestee is subject to search just like with any other container.  No search warrant is needed. 

            Well, Diaz is history.  Erase it from your mind.  The United States Supreme Court intervened and, resolving conflicting opinions on this issue from throughout the country,  ruled to the contrary in two combined cases under the single title of Riley v. California (June 25, 2014) 2014 U.S. LEXIS 4497.

               California’s contribution stemmed from an incident occurring in San Diego itself.  David Riley was arrested when two concealed firearms were recovered from his car during an inventory search.  When Riley was searched incident to arrest, a “smart phone” was seized from his person.  This cellphone was itself subsequently searched, the contents of which helped connect Riley to an earlier drive-by shooting as well as provide the basis for a gang allegation, per P.C. § 186.22, aggravating his ultimate sentence. Riley appealed. 

            From the east coast, Brima Wurie, was arrested by Boston police after having been observed by officers selling drugs from his car.  A “flip phone” was seized from Wurie’s person and searched.  Its contents helped lead officers to Wurie’s apartment which, pursuant to a search warrant, resulted in the recovery of enough dope to get him indicted in federal court.  The First Circuit Court of Appeal reversed his conviction and the Government appealed.

            In both cases, the ....

© 2026 Legal Updates, LLC.
This content is protected by copyright law. Republishing or redistribution in any form without written permission is strictly prohibited. For licensing or reprint requests, contact support@legalupdates.com.