SLIDE 1
Tina O. Miller Farrell & Reisinger LLC
SLIDE 2 Whether the warrantless seizure and search of
historical cell phone records revealing the location and movements of a cell phone user
- ver the course of 127 days is permitted by the
Fourth Amendment.
SLIDE 3
Riley v. California and United States v. Wurie Fourth Amendment: The right of the people to
be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Expectation of privacy/is expectation
reasonable?
SLIDE 4 United States v. Winn, 79 F. Supp. 3d 904 (S.D.
- Il. 2015) (particularity)
United States v. Camou, 773 F.3d 932 (9th Cir.
2014) (exigent circumstances and vehicle search exception)
SLIDE 5
Fifth Amendment Commonwealth of Virginia v. Baust, No. CR14-
1439, at 1 (Va. 2d Cir. Ct. Oct. 28, 2014) (fingerprint for phone)
In Re: Application for a Search Warrant, 236
F.Supp.3d 1066 (N.D. Ill. 2017)
SLIDE 6
SLIDE 7
California Assembly Bill 1681 (Smartphone
encryption)
House Bill 4528 (Encrypt Act) New York State Assembly Bill A8093A
SLIDE 8
SLIDE 9 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTl_Clu
SLIDE 10 Automated License Plate Recognition—
estimates of up to 1,800 license plates a minute captured during day or night
Info stored in databases
http://www.theiacp.org/ALPL
SLIDE 11
SLIDE 12
Statutory Warrant Requirements Domestic Drone Information Center
https://www.nacdl.org/News.aspx?id=26728&sec=ddic
Search with Aircraft: California v. Ciraolo, Dow Chemical v. United States and Florida v. Riley Kyllo v. United States (thermal imaging case)
SLIDE 13 “Network Investigative Technique” a/k/a
Hacking
Law enforcement has been using malware to
investigate online criminal activity since 2002
Can occur on individual basis or en masse Website Infection – when a user clicks on the
website, malware is installed on the user’s computer, the user’s IP address is sent to law enforcement
Tippens case – 8000 computers, 120 countries,
SLIDE 14
SLIDE 15
(F) Reports of Examinations and Tests. Upon a defendant's request, the government must permit a defendant to inspect and to copy or photograph the results or reports of any physical or mental examination and of any scientific test or experiment if: (i) the item is within the government's possession, custody, or control; (ii) the attorney for the government knows—or through due diligence could know—that the item exists; and (iii) the item is material to preparing the defense or the government intends to use the item in its case-in-chief at trial.
Roviaro v. United States, 353 U.S. 53 (1957) Where disclosure of an informer's identity, or of the contents of his communication, is relevant and helpful to the defense of an accused, or is essential to a fair trial, the Government's privilege to withhold disclosure of the informer's identity must give way.