Riley v.

California
CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA,
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION ONE

Statement: David Riley wants to appeal his conviction based on the premise that his 4
th
amendment
rights were violated when police during his arrest search through his phone, which
ended up connecting him to a gang related shooting.

Proc. History: Riley filed motion to suppress all gang related evidence obtained from the phone prior
to the trial. Trial Court denied the motion and Riley was convicted. On appeal, the
California Court of Appeal affirmed the lower courts decision. By Writ of Certiorari the
US Supreme Court reviewed the case.

Issue: Can the police, without warrant, search digital information or data on a cell phone
seized from an individual when they are being arrested?

Facts: David Riley was stopped for a traffic violation that eventually led to his arrest on
weapons charges. An officer searching Riley incident to the arrest seized his smart
phone and accessed information associating Riley to a gang. Photographs and videos
found on the phone connected Riley to a gang shooting that occurred earlier in the
month. Riley was convicted on all counts with enhanced sentencing do to his discovered
gang affiliation. The officers and gang detective had no warrant to search the phone.

Rules: -A warrantless search is reasonable when conducted incident to a lawful arrest.
-Chimel v. California- a search incident to arrest is to be limited to the area within the
arrestees immediate control, where it is justified by the interests in officer safety and in
preventing the destruction of evidence.
-No intrusion of privacy beyond custodial arrest searches or those related to the
concerns outlined by Chimel.
-Is government interest more important than the privacy of the individual?
-Arizona v. Gant
-U.S. v. Robinson

Reasoning: -Data/Information on a cell phone do not pose harm to the arresting officers.
-There are means officers can use to prevent the destruction of any possible evidence
on phones. (Faraday bags) Also it is unlikely in arrest that officers can do anything to
prevent encryption/locking of the phones due to the nature of arrest procedure.
- The amount of personal/private information kept on phones is massive, and by
searching it is a truly substantial intrusion of privacy. Cell phones differ qualitatively and
quantitatively from anything else that can held on your person.

Holdings: No, without warrant, police cannot search the information on your phone immediate to
an incident of arrest. It was a violation of Rileys 4
th
amendment rights and the evidence
against him should not have been admitted into court. The lower courts ruling was
reversed.