According to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), almost 90% of all crimes leave “digital footprints.” This is hardly surprising, as the daily activities of an average New Yorker occur in both digital and physical environments. The average New Yorker also racks up many hours of screen time per day. Long ago, law enforcement agencies introduced new technologies and techniques to adapt to this digital environment, and prosecutors now rely on digital evidence to convict numerous defendants each year. However, defense attorneys in New York have also adapted to this new environment with novel strategies that revolve around potential Fourth Amendment violations.
Although courts around the nation are still trying to clarify the Fourth Amendment protections that may apply in these situations, past cases indicate that appeals based on the illegal search of digital devices are possible. Defendants may want to explore this topic in more detail with an experienced criminal appeals attorney in New York. Continue this discussion with The Law Office of Benjamin Greenwald at (845) 567-4820.
The Fourth Amendment Protects Against Unlawful Searches and Seizures
To understand how an illegal search of digital devices might be unlawful, defendants should first strive to comprehend the underlying principles of the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution protects private citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures carried out by the government. This applies to numerous potential situations. Courts established long ago that law enforcement agencies must obtain search warrants to enter private residences, access vehicles, and search the bodies of suspects. Law enforcement agencies can only circumvent this requirement in certain situations.
As a result of this constitutional right, private citizens may file appeals after experiencing Fourth Amendment violations. Any evidence collected via unconstitutional searches and seizures should be inadmissible in court. If the prosecutors rely heavily on the admissibility of this evidence, they may be forced to drop charges once they realize the underlying constitutional violations. They may attempt to have the evidence admitted anyway, but an experienced defense attorney could potentially highlight the unlawful nature of the search during a trial. If a defendant or their attorney fails to highlight the inadmissibility of this evidence during their trial (or if the judge incorrectly allows the evidence), there may be a second chance to raise these concerns during an appeal.
Does the Fourth Amendment Apply to Digital Devices?
The key question is whether the Fourth Amendment applies to digital devices. A number of cases have explored this topic in detail, with some going before the Supreme Court. The Brennan Center for Justice highlights a 2018 Supreme Court Decision that provides some clarity on this subject. In Carpenter v. United States, the Supreme Court found that law enforcement violated the Fourth Amendment when it requested a week of global positioning system (GPS) data from the cell phone provider of a defendant without a warrant. At least in this specific situation, Fourth Amendment rights apply not only to physical possessions but also to digital GPS data.
As Congress notes, another notable case came in 2014 with Riley v. California. This case also went before the Supreme Court, which decided that police officers must obtain warrants before accessing and searching through cell phone data in certain situations. The court accepted that after a lawful arrest, warrant requirements may not always apply. However, it maintained that cellphone data should be exempted from this rule. In justifying its decision, the court noted that warrant requirements after lawful arrests are only void to prevent harm to officers or the destruction of evidence.
Since digital evidence does not pose these risks, there is no reason to allow warrantless searches. While these cases are relatively new, the underlying case law is based on precedents set over a century ago. The Constitution Center points out that the Fourth Amendment has applied to mail since Ex Parte Jackson in 1878. Courts subsequently applied these protections to telephone communications, e-mails, and text messages. In general, anything a person seeks to keep private is subject to the Fourth Amendment, even when that person transmits the communications across public environments like the internet.
Can the Government Hold Onto My Cellphone Indefinitely?
Despite Fourth Amendment protections, law enforcement agencies may have the right to seize digital devices, access the data, and gather evidence in many situations. Defendants who wish to determine when the illegal search of digital devices violates the Constitution may wish to contact The Law Office of Benjamin Greenwald for further information. Each case is unique, and while the Supreme Court has issued notable decisions on this issue in the past, the legal restrictions on law enforcement agencies are not clearly defined. Defendants should also know that even if law enforcement legally seizes and searches their devices, the government may not be justified in holding onto these devices indefinitely.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) highlights a recent case in which a defendant had his digital devices seized as part of a criminal investigation. When the defendant requested that the government return his device and its data, the government refused, asserting its right to hold onto the device indefinitely. The Eighth Circuit disagreed with this assertion, noting that Fourth Amendment protections applied in this situation. In this type of situation, the government has a legal burden to prove that its ongoing confiscation of the device serves some kind of purpose. If it cannot overcome this burden, the government must return the device.
Learn More About Illegal Search Appeals With The Law Office of Benjamin Greenwald
Defendants who feel that they have experienced an illegal search of digital devices may be able to file appeals in New York. Courts have established that a smartphone is more than just a digital tool, and it represents a collection of personal digital belongings. Aside from its digital nature, information from a smartphone is virtually identical to items left inside a vehicle or a residence. Police officers should be extremely wary of the Fourth Amendment when seizing and searching digital devices. The illegal search of digital devices may lead to valid appeals, and defendants can explore this possibility in more detail with an experienced criminal defense attorney in New York. To expand on this complex topic, consider contacting the Law Office of Benjamin Greenwald at (845) 567-4820.
