ipl-logo

Riley Vs California Research Paper

833 Words4 Pages

Charlie Avery Mr. Kotowski U.S. History 17 February, 2015 Riley vs. California Research Paper The Riley versus California case is one of the most recent Supreme Court proceedings dealing with the Fourth Amendment. The case between David Leon Riley and the State of California was fought over whether police should be able to search cell phones without a warrant when they are apprehending a suspect. The Supreme Court had the Job of discovering if Riley’s Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches was violated (EPIC, “Riley v. California”). The judges, headed by Chief Justice John G. Roberts had a very difficult decision to make, as they had to apply an Amendment from 1789 to the modern, digital age, where people store so …show more content…

Upon searching Riley’s name in their database, officers discovered that Riley had been driving on a suspended license, and put him under arrest (Oyez, “Riley v. California”). The article from Oyez also says that the Police’s standard protocol was to search the car for drugs, firearms, or any suspicious items before impounding the car. When this occurred, two guns were found. After finding this information the police also examined Riley’s cellphone before obtaining a proper warrant; they found pictures of Riley flashing gang signs, texts, all of which were subsequently used to link Riley to an attempted homicide twenty days prior to the arrest, with this evidence Riley was charged with an unassociated murder on August 2nd. (EPIC, “Riley v. California”) Bensur and Brokamp say in their article that in court, Riley claimed that his Fourth Amendment right was violated because the officers did not have probable cause also called reasonable suspicion to examine his phone. The case went to the Supreme Court and the judges agreed that the police had acted …show more content…

Roberts. The Court’s decision was a unanimous 9-0 in favor of David Riley (Oyez, “Riley v. California”). This means that there was no dissenting opinion because the all the judges voted the same. In the judges statement says that it is unnecessary to search the phone right away because it can just be held until a proper warrant is obtained. The judges also claimed that because of the “Cloud” most of the information that would be searched is not technically in physical possession of the person.(Oyez, “Riley v. California”). It is clear from this ruling that the Supreme Court Judges want to make sure that everyone in the U.S. has the privacy that they

Show More
Related

  • Supreme Court Case: Riley Vs. California

    1346 Words  | 6 Pages

    The writ questioned “Whether or under what circumstances the Fourth Amendment permits police officers to conduct a warrantless search of the digital contents of an individual’s cell phone seized from the person at the time of arrest”, SCOTUSblog.com; and it was granted on January 17, 2014 in part because Federal and State Courts had openly divided opinions over this issue. Riley v. California was argued on April 29, 2014 and a decision was made on June 25, 2014. The Supreme Court, under Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. declared by a unanimous decision that a warrantless cell phone search violates the Fourth Amendment right to privacy. The court stated that the warrantless search exception (SITA) does not apply to this case because digital data store in an electronic device cannot be used as a weapon to harm officers. Although, the court recognizes that possible evidence stored on a cell phone may be wiped remotely, it also acknowledges that it could be avoided by disconnecting the cell phone from the network and placing it in a Faraday bag.

    Read More

  • California Vs. Greenwood Case Study

    478 Words  | 2 Pages

    The case involves the question of whether or not the police were within their rights to search the trash that was left at the curbside without a warrant. The amendment

    Read More

  • David Leon Riley: The Lincoln Park Gang

    524 Words  | 3 Pages

    David Leon Riley, a gangster who is in the Lincoln Park Gang in San Diego, CA was involved in a rival gang shooting. The rival of Riley’s gang shot at the Lincoln Park Gang and then got into Riley’s vehicle, stole it, and drove off. Riley had his cell phone in his possession when he was apprehended. So a detective analyzed the videos and photographs of Riley making gang signs and other gang indicia that were stored on the phone to verify whether Riley was gang affiliated. On August 22, 2009, the police pulled Riley over which he was driving a different car which later they found out that he was driving on expired license registration tags.

    Read More

  • Summary Of Costanza Vs Seinfeld

    560 Words  | 3 Pages

    The ruling was made on the case by the New York State Supreme Court upon frivolous litigation. Issue Under the New York’s Civil Rights Law §§ 50 and 51, does the plaintiff have a valid claim for violation of his right to privacy? Holdings

    Read More

  • Arnie's Confidentiality Policy

    2313 Words  | 10 Pages

    Because technology is continually growing, new laws are being passed regarding technology and confidentiality. This article questions the “invasive” internet searches and looks for a constitutional answer. As of now, no electronic device can be confiscated and searched without a warrant. This could prove to be beneficial for Arnie. If he was to report Mr. Bowen’s suspicious data to the police, they would be able to obtain a warrant to officially search Mr. Bowen’s computer.

    Read More

  • How Do Phone Snooping Violate The 4th Amendment

    248 Words  | 1 Pages

    A phone with bank information can be a top prize for a treacherous police officer. They can go to your home, text contacts, even steal identities if you put enough information on alleged “secure” personal devices. Phone snooping violates the 4th amendment, which says "[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated…”. When Gregory Diaz, a California resident who was seen participating a drug deal, was ordered to hand over his phone to an officer without a warrant, it violated the amendment. The Supreme Court, when notified about the case, decided that Diaz’s case was an exception to the 200 y/o rule.

    Read More

  • Argumentative Essay: Stingray In The United States

    674 Words  | 3 Pages

    A different federal judge ruled that if the DEA wishes to use a stingray to bring in a criminal then they must have a warrant to use it [source]. The argument that a lot of people will make when it comes to surveillance is that if you’ve done nothing wrong, then you have nothing to hide. If we apply that same logic to this specific case, then we might as well say that the government should be able to put a unique tracking device on each one of us that we must always carry around. Many people would probably no want to be constantly tracked by the government openly, so why should we be okay with tracking us whenever they want, just without announcing it? We are afforded legal protections for most other private areas in our lives so why should we have almost no rights when it comes to something that we depend on and use every day?

    Read More

  • Dk Dbq Analysis

    742 Words  | 3 Pages

    These actions did not go by what was established by an earlier, similar case, and by performing the scan with no warrant, the government did not allow DLK to conduct private activities in his own home. Although some argue that the government’s actions were acceptable because they only scanned what was visible to the public, they still used a device not readily available to the public to see inside DLK’s home. The government’s actions were unacceptable, and a warrant should have been obtained prior to performing the search in order to make it

    Read More

  • Rochin V. California Case Study

    1431 Words  | 6 Pages

    The Supreme Court case, Rochin v. California, was a case that had shocked the conscience. The brutality and laziness of the police left the petitioner, Richard Rochin, violated of his fourth, fifth, and fourteenth amendments. The ignorance of unreasonable search, self-incrimination, and due process led this case to be a landmark of police work and processes paralleling with the rights of the Constitution. On July 1st, 1949, three Los Angeles police officers entered Richard Rochin’s residence after a tip came through their police hotline.

    Read More

  • Savana Redding Case Study

    1265 Words  | 6 Pages

    That said, however, the cases viewing school strip searches differently from the way we see them are numerous enough, with well-reasoned majority and dissenting opinions, to counsel doubt that we were sufficiently clear in the prior statement of law. We conclude that qualified immunity is warranted. The strip search of Savana Redding was unreasonable and a violation of the Fourth Amendment, but petitioners Wilson, Romero, and Schwallier are nevertheless protected from liability through qualified immunity. The conclusions here do not resolve, however, the question of the liability of petitioner Safford Unified School District #1 a claim the Ninth Circuit did not address. The judgment of the Ninth Circuit is therefore affirmed in part and reversed in part, and this case is remanded for consideration of the Monell claim.

    Read More

  • Fourth Amendment Dbq

    778 Words  | 4 Pages

    (Source 1.2) If the government wanted to go further than top-line data, for example listening to someone’s phone calls that is when the government needs to go to a federal judge. Furthermore, a judge and the government work together so everyone's privacy is protected and that is their

    Read More

  • Argumentative Essay On The Fourth Amendment

    427 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Verdict discussed how both cases were attempting to suppress evidence from their cell phones which now contain much more information than they once did. Cases like this continue to shape our rights. The fourth amendment is here to protect ourselves from being incriminated. In modern day the fourth amendment is in question due to new technology.

    Read More

  • Argumentative Essay: Should The NSA Surveillance

    169 Words  | 1 Pages

    The whole point of the Fourth Amendment is not to completely stop the police, because the amendment can be waived if an officer has a warrant, or a person’s consent. The Fourth Amendment states that generally a search or seizure is illegal unless there is a warrant, or special circumstances. Technically stating that a citizen is protected by the Fourth Amendment, until a government employee gets a warrant, and then they can invade a citizen’s privacy. Also people state that the FISA Court’s warrants are constitutional, but the NSA’s surveillance is unconstitutional. Even though people do not like the NSA’s surveillance, the NSA is legal because the FISA Court that the people did not mind makes it legal.

    Read More

  • Key Constitutional Concepts By Leonore Annemore Annenberg Institute For Civics

    644 Words  | 3 Pages

    This landmark case affirmed that the 6th Amendment applies to all states under the 14th Amendment. Not only did the video show the importance of the amendments to the constitution, it also demonstrated the possible pitfalls of judicial review, but also its ability to ensure the personal rights provided by the constitution are not

    Read More

  • The Right To Privacy

    989 Words  | 4 Pages

    The right to privacy is not only a human right but an element to various legal traditions which may restrain both government and private party action that threaten the privacy of an individual The fourth, fifth and the ninth amendment protect our right to privacy. Today our privacy is being threaten due to the growing issues that threaten our national security. With growing amount of terrorist attacks, bombings, school shooting, and other massive shootings it definitely seems to warrant the loss of privacy. However, how far is too far and who decides?

    Read More

More about Riley Vs California Research Paper

Open Document