Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373 (2014), [1] is a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the court ruled that the warrantless search and seizure of the digital contents of a cell phone during an arrest is unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment.
The data stored on your cell phone is protected under the 1986 Stored ... Law enforcement is required to have a valid search warrant before gathering cell phone data and other information from ...
Warrantless searches are searches and seizures conducted without court-issued search warrants.. In the United States, warrantless searches are restricted under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, part of the Bill of Rights, which states, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not ...
A search warrant is a court order that a magistrate or judge issues to authorize law enforcement officers to conduct a search of a person, location, or vehicle for evidence of a crime and to confiscate any evidence they find. In most countries, a search warrant cannot be issued in aid of civil process.
In the case of U.S. Rep. Scott Perry and the efforts of York County media outlets to gain access to a search warrant and supporting documents that resulted in the FBI seizing his cell phone in ...
Ellis that the use of a stingray constituted a search that requires a warrant, but did not suppress the evidence based on exigent circumstances and good faith exception. [30] On September 21, 2017, the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled in Prince Jones v. United States that using a stingray requires a warrant. [31] [32] [33]
A geofence warrant or a reverse location warrant is a search warrant issued by a court to allow law enforcement to search a database to find all active mobile devices within a particular geo-fence area.
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us