ipl-logo

Riley Vs California Case Study

649 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Riley v california case facts

1. Riley v. California
573 U.S. (2014)
United States Supreme Court

2. Key Facts:

A. Riley was stopped for a traffic violation. An officer seized a cell phone from Riley’s pants pocket without a warrant. Utilizing digital information accessed from the cell phone, detectives discovered records tying Riley to a criminal street gang and that placed Riley’s phone at a shooting three weeks prior to his traffic violation. The State charged Riley in connection to a shooting and sought to add a gang enhancement to his sentence.

B. Riley was convicted in California of assault with a semiautomatic firearm, shooting at an occupied vehicle, and attempted murder.

C. Riley moved to suppress all evidence that the police had obtained from his cell phone. The trial court denied the motion and Riley was charged. Riley was convicted in …show more content…

The California Court of Appeal later affirmed the convictions and denied the suppression of evidence on the basis of California Supreme Court’s decision in People v. Diaz.

3. Issue: The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable search and seizure. Riley involves whether police officers can search a suspect’s cell phone without a warrant during an arrest. In Riley v. California, the lower court ruled that a police officer not only can seize and secure a suspect’s cell phone during an arrest, but they can also search the contents of that phone without a warrant or probable cause. Riley moved to suppress all the evidence the officers had obtained during the search of his cell phone on the grounds that the search violated his Fourth Amendment rights.

The Fourth Amendment of the United States Bill of Rights reads, “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 of affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be

Show More
Related
455 Words | 2 Pages

They have also said that it is reasonable for any officer to do an immediate area search of where that individual is to make sure that they can not grab anything for a weapon like for example a knife. The Supreme Court clearly notes in its opinion that such searches have to happen in the immediate area of arrest and any such search outside that area must be made with a search warrant. In Chimel case the officers could have patted down Chimel and then done a search of the immediate area to make sure that no weapons were hiding around. But once they began looking all around the house that requires a search warrant. The Supreme Court reversed the California Supreme Court’s

Read More
478 Words | 2 Pages

The main facts of the case California v. Greenwood are that in the beginning of 1984, the police of Laguna Beach, California had information that gave them reason to believe that a certain person, Billy Greenwood, was dealing drugs. A police officer named Jenny Stracner told the garbage collectors to bring the trash from Greenwood’s residence to the police station so that they could go through the garbage to find if there was evidence of drug dealing. They did. They then obtained a warrant to search the house, and found more evidence. The police then arrested Greenwood.

Read More
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
602 Words | 3 Pages

In 1988, California v. Billy Greenwood and Dyanne Van Houten was about a suspecting of selling and using drugs in Mr. Greenwood house a narcotic officer told the man to bring her the trash bag which Greenwood had placed out the street for pick up, but as the officer search the bags she found drug paraphernalia which was used as evidence to convict Mr. Greenwood but the lower court revoked it because she search the trash bag without a warrant and that was a violation of the fourth amendment. but the trash bags was placed on the street were any child or animal can unseal it so he could not argue about his privacy if it was out in the police for anything or any person to expose the content of the bags but the court stated “ the police cannot reasonably be expected to avert their eyes from evidence of criminal activity that could have been observed by any member of the public “ this means

Read More
1396 Words | 6 Pages

In June 1968 the United States Supreme Court affirmed that the conviction allows police officers to interrogate and frisk suspicious individuals.(Chief Justice Warren) Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1

Read More
1800 Words | 8 Pages

Issue: Whether the warrantless seizure and search of historical cellphone records revealing the location and movements of a cellphone user of the course of 127 days is permitted by the Fourth Amendment? Facts: In April 2011, a group of four men were arrested for a series of armed robberies in Michigan and Ohio. One of the four men confessed to the crimes, and he gave the FBI his number along with the number of everyone else involved in the crime. One of the people convicted in the crime was Timothy Carpenter.

Read More
167 Words | 1 Pages

Billy is on the phone with Bob while they are talking on the phone and someone coughs and it is neither of them. Well, the government are the only ones who can hack phones and listen to phone calls, the 4th amendment has allowed this to happen. The 4th amendment has gavin the right to law enforcement to be cruel and unfair about a search and seizure. Without a warrant you cannot search a person, well not anymore, the government can search anyone at any time in some scenarios. Normally, there is an abundant amount of evidence used to be given the permission to search one’s belongings, but since 9/11 law enforcement needs little evidence to be provided a search warrant.

Read More
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
742 Words | 3 Pages

According to the Fourth Amendment, people have the right to be secure in their private property, and may only be searched with probable cause. However, in a recent case, this right was violated by the government. An Oregon citizen, with the initials of DLK, was suspected of growing marijuana in his home. The federal government used a thermal imager to scan his home, and were later given a warrant to physically search his home. However, many remain divided over whether or not this scan was constitutional, as there was no warrant at the time of the scan.

Read More
829 Words | 4 Pages

The officer seized a smartphone from his pants. The record is not clear as to what the officers did with this cell phone, but there is no doubt that an officer went through the text messages. Later on a detective that specialized in gang investigations also searched the phone at the police station. This detective not only went through text messages, but also pictures and videos. Based on what was found,

Read More
1569 Words | 7 Pages

Justice Clarence Thomas was nominated to be on the Supreme Court in 1991 and was described by Halliburton as “an honor that was to carry Clarence Thomas to the height of fame and to the brink of disaster” (13). As it pertains to his position on the court and how he functions in various cases he can be described by many words: conservative, originalist, even a textualist. These characteristics have influenced the interpretation of laws and the Constitution since the nineties unto today. The Fourth Amendment states: “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.

Read More
106 Words | 1 Pages

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Consitution is the part of the Bill of Rights that prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires any warrant be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. The common misconception is that it simply covers what it states. In the age of development and new technology, it is likely that what we consider secrets or personal information is not as secret or personal as we once believed. Important pieces of evidence or information have often been found through illegal means, and this has led to many cases that change the way the constitution and the Fourth Amendment affect

Read More
210 Words | 1 Pages

The fourth amendment can be beneficial but, it can also to some U.S. citizens be invasion of privacy. The fourth amendment states “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated,” some U.S. citizens believe that Law Enforcement, the Government and the NSA are violating the required guidelines of the Fourth Amendment. The NSA is conducted a mass U.S. surveillance not to believe specific individuals may be engaging in terrorist activity, but instead to believe all of us may be engaging in such activity. The government mass surveillance proves that U.S. citizens are considered suspects at all times. With the Patriot Act the NSA has access to

Read More
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
750 Words | 3 Pages

Since the amendments were established, they were used to help citizens with their individual rights. The fourth amendment is one of the most violated amendments throughout history of public officials. The Fourth Amendment clearly sates, that people have the right to be secure in their person, houses, paper, and against unreasonable search and seizures. Even if a person is guilty, if their fourth amendment is violated, the evidence that is obtained will not be used in court. After such incidences involving the fourth amendment, the plain view doctrine was put in place so that an officer is able to seize without a warrant and obtain evidence from a suspect.

Read More

More about Riley Vs California Case Study

Related Topics

Open Document