“Doug & Chris are top notch. Both are extremely competent, family oriented and deliver results.”-D.P.
Recent Blog Posts
Tracking Technology Can Find A Suspect Within A Few Feet
Technology is advancing rapidly with new devices and software programs being developed every day. These new technological developments have impacted nearly every facet of society, from how we communicate to how we drive. One other area that has seen many changes due to improving technology is law enforcement. Police departments across the country have taken advantage of advancements in things like surveillance equipment to catch criminals in ways that would not have been available in the past.
One device that a number of law enforcement agencies, both state and federal, have been using is called a cell-site simulator, also known as a 'stingray'. This device allows "police to pinpoint a phone's location within a few yards by posing as a cell tower." The police are able to find the suspect, but "[i]n the process, they can intercept information from the phones of nearly everyone else who happens to be nearby, including innocent bystanders." However, the information captured does not include the content of any communications.
Police Need A Warrant To Search Cell Phone
New and evolving technology often leads to novel of legal issues for the courts to address. In 2014, the United States Supreme Court addressed one such issue in the case of Riley v. California. The issue at hand was whether or not law enforcement could search a suspect's cell phone without a warrant.
Riley was actually a consolidation of two cases where the police had searched a suspect's phone without first getting a warrant. In analyzing the case, the Supreme Court stated that, under the Fourth Amendment, generally a warrant is required in order to conduct a search. The court further stated that "[i]n the absence of a warrant, a search is reasonable only if it falls within a specific exception to the warrant requirement." One warrant exception that has been recognized is the search incident to arrest exception. It was this exception that had been used to justify the searches in both of the Riley cases. To determine if cell phone data fell into the search incident to arrest exception, the court looked at "the degree to which [the search] intrudes upon an individual's privacy and... the degree to which [the search] is needed for the promotion of legitimate governmental interests."