Ohio court: Cell phone searches require warrant

[Tonitrus]

By the way the ruling is crap.

You don't (or shouldn't) consider the cell phone as separate from where and how it is found.  If the cell phone is on the person, and police are entitled to search the person, then they are entitled to look on the cell phone.  If police are not entitled to search the person, they can't search the cell phone. 

It's as simple as that.

No, it's not that simple.

For example, when taking a suspect into custody, the police are allowed to search him for concealed weapons, but if he happens to be carrying his appointment book on his person, they don't have the authority to look through that--the warrantless search is allowed in this instance to ensure the safety of the police and any bystanders, but it's limited to that purpose.

Of course, it's entirely possible that Canadian law differs on this subject.

Not substantially.  If detaining a suspect (not taking him into custody) police are allowed to do a cursory search for weapons.  They would not be entitled to go through a cell phone.

However if police are arresting someone, they are actually obliged to search and catalogue all of that person's effects.  As such they are entitled to search the cell phone.

1 cell phone.  Cataloging complete.

I wonder though, how it would go if the cell phone were password/code-protected (as mine is).  Could the officer legally compel the arrestee to disclose the code? 

[Barrister]

1 cell phone.  Cataloging complete.

I wonder though, how it would go if the cell phone were password/code-protected (as mine is).  Could the officer legally compel the arrestee to disclose the code?

How well do you think:

1 purse

Would work as a catalogue?

[Jacob]

How well do you think:

1 purse

Would work as a catalogue?

So if they find a book they have to read it as part of the catalogue process?

[dps]

They have to catalog stuff because they have to return it to the prisoner when he's released.  That's not the same thing as searching it for evidence.

But I think we're in a situation where Canadian law and US law differ, so I think this is kind of pointless.

[sbr]

1 cell phone.  Cataloging complete.

I wonder though, how it would go if the cell phone were password/code-protected (as mine is).  Could the officer legally compel the arrestee to disclose the code?

Can anyone answer the second part of the question?

[Tonitrus]

1 cell phone.  Cataloging complete.

I wonder though, how it would go if the cell phone were password/code-protected (as mine is).  Could the officer legally compel the arrestee to disclose the code?

How well do you think:

1 purse

Would work as a catalogue?

I don't know anyone that keeps perfume, makeup, money, credit cards, lip gloss, chapstick, sunglasses, .38 specials, and whatever other assorted crap women keep in purses, inside a cell phone.

[DontSayBanana]

Not substantially.  If detaining a suspect (not taking him into custody) police are allowed to do a cursory search for weapons.  They would not be entitled to go through a cell phone.

However if police are arresting someone, they are actually obliged to search and catalogue all of that person's effects.  As such they are entitled to search the cell phone.

Let's go back to the laptop analogy.  If the police arrest a person for assault and battery who happens to be carrying a laptop computer, the arrest itself is sufficient grounds to search the files on the laptop?  Good luck getting a judge to admit that evidence.

[DontSayBanana]

1 cell phone.  Cataloging complete.

I wonder though, how it would go if the cell phone were password/code-protected (as mine is).  Could the officer legally compel the arrestee to disclose the code?

Can anyone answer the second part of the question?

Without a warrant?  No.  With a warrant, refusing access could conceivably get you charged with obstruction of justice.