Supreme Court of Florida



FOURTH AMENDMENT UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION

The Cell Phone Search Case

Smallwood v. State of Florida

One morning the quite town of Florida City was shocked to hear that a robbery had taken place at Seminole Bank. The robber, armed with a gun, held bank workers hostage until he’d collected $20,000 in cash.

The robber had been wearing a mask so the witnesses were unable to identify him. Florida City is a small town where everyone is well acquainted with each other. Several witness stated they recognized the robber’s voice and thought it was Mr. Smallwood.

Mr. Smallwood agreed to meet with police officers at a Popeye’s Chicken restaurant to discuss the case. Based on the witness statements and other evidence, he was arrested and handcuffed. The police searched his “person” for weapons and evidence. The police found a cell phone in his pants pocket. One officer then looked “in” the phone to verify two things: 1) if it was Mr. Smallwood’s phone and 2) to determine if it contained any pictures or anything else that might be evidence to the crime. The police found photos relating to the arrested crime that included Mr. Smallwood with a gun and large amounts of cash.

TRIAL COURT PROCEEDINGS & RULING: At trial, Mr. Smallwood’s attorney filed a motion to suppress the evidence (keep it from being used at trial) that was found in Mr. Smallwood’s cell phone. His attorneys argued that his Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures was violated when the police searched the photos on his cell phone without a warrant.

The motion was denied by the trial court judge and the photos were allowed to be used as evidence against Mr. Smallwood at trial. The trial court reasoned that the cell phone is similar to a container in the defendant’s vehicle at the time of the arrest and ruled that the search of the cell phone was allowed. Mr. Smallwood was convicted of armed robbery and possession of a firearm and sentenced to 65 years in prison.

THE APPEAL: Mr. Smallwood appealed the trial court’s interpretation of the Fourth Amendment to the District Court of Appeal. The District Court of Appeal agreed with the trial court and ruled that the search was valid.

Mr. Smallwood is now asking the Florida Supreme Court to consider his arguments and reverse the decision of the lower court.

Constitutional Question the Justices Must Answer:

Did the police violate the Fourth Amendment when they searched, without a warrant, through pictures contained in a cell phone that was on a person

when arrested?

Case Precedent - Previous Case Law:

Chimel v. California (1969) – A search incident to arrest may only include the arrestee’s person and the area within his immediate control – which means the area from within which he might gain possession of a weapon or destroy evidence. (“grab area”)

Police can’t rummage through an entire house without a search warrant. It is important to use warrants and probable cause to combat the abuse of government power.

United States v. Robinson (1973) - A search of a suspect incident to a lawful arrest (based upon probable cause) is not only a valid exception to the warrant requirement but is a “reasonable” search under the Fourth Amendment and requires no further justification for the search.

The police don’t have to give a reason to search items within control of the arrested person.

New York v. Belton (1981) – A search of a suspect’s effects incident to a lawful arrest includes open or closed containers. A container is defined as any object capable of holding another object.

Concluded the police can search containers in the passenger compartment of a car for evidence and weapons. The authority to search is given because it followed a lawful arrest based on probable cause.

PETITIONER’S ARGUMENTS

– The Cell Phone Search Case –

MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT. MY NAME IS __________ AND I REPRESENT THE PETITIONER, MR. SMALLWOOD, WHO ARGUES THAT SEARCH THROUGH MR. SMALLWOOD’S CELL PHONE DID VIOLATE THE FOURTH AMENDMENT.

Mr. Smallwood’s Arguments (against the cell phone search) include:

1. A full search after an arrest DOES NOT include going into someone’s cell phone.

2. Searching images on a cell phone when there is no reason to believe that the cell phone contains evidence of a crime exceeds the police’s power to search a person’s belongings after an arrest.

3. The definition of a container is any object capable of holding another object. Cell phones hold data – such as images, phone numbers, messages - and not objects.

4. We should not extend the power of the police to search INTO an electronic device as an exception to the 4th Amendment.

5. People have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their stored images on their cell phones even after they are arrested.

6. Mr. Smallwood was already handcuffed so there was no threat to destroying evidence that MAY have been contained in the cell phone.

7. The police could have easily held onto the cell phone and then obtained a search warrant. The phone wasn’t going anywhere.

Try to think of other arguments against the cell phone search. Write these arguments on the note pad at your seat.

– The Cell Phone Search Case –

Supreme Court Justices - Questions for the Petitioner

(against the cell phone search)

Directions: Justices ask questions to the attorneys to understand the arguments and to clarify any legal interpretations. Your job is to listen to both sets of arguments, ask questions for understanding, interpret the law presented and make a decision.

Justices may take notes, ask their own questions, use the questions below or reword them. Questions must be relevant to the case and to the attorney’s position that is arguing.

1. In the past, the courts have given the police the permission to search a person’s belongs that are on him when he is arrested so that evidence isn’t destroyed. Could the pictures on the cell phone have been destroyed?

2. Is there any way the cell phone images could have been destroyed, maybe remotely by another person, before the police obtained a search warrant for the phone?

3. Precedent cases allow the police to search through open notebooks and unsealed envelopes that could contain photographs; how are images on a cell phone different from printed images in an envelope?

4. If the cell phone had been locked with a password, would that change the circumstance because the police could not easily look through phone? If it was locked, could the police force Mr. Smallwood to unlock the phone?

5. Don’t you think that if someone is legally under arrest they give up their rights of privacy?

6. Explain how a cell phone is different than a simple container.

7. Didn’t Mr. Smallwood agree to meet with the police ahead of time at Popeye’s Restaurant…how much privacy can he expect in what he brings with him – for example, in his cell phone?

Try to think of other questions for the attorneys who are against the cell phone search.

RESPONDENT’S ARGUMENTS

– The Cell Phone Search Case –

MAY IT PLEASE THE COURT. MY NAME IS __________ AND I REPRESENT THE RESPONDENT, THE STATE OF FLORIDA, WHO ARGUES THAT SEARCH THROUGH MR. SMALLWOOD’S CELL PHONE DID NOT VIOLATE THE FOURTH AMENDMENT.

Police’s Arguments (for the cell phone search) include:

1. A reasonable FULL search of the person after they have been arrested is lawful. The search of Mr. Smallwood’s cell phone was in the full authority of the police to do.

2. This lawful arrest justifies the search into his “effects” such as the cell phone.

3. The police are allowed to look for any evidence of a crime before it is destroyed that may be on the arrested person so that it can be used at trial.

4. The seizure of the cell phone images had to happen quickly so that the images could not be erased from the cell phone before the police could find them.

5. A cell phone must be viewed as a “container” because it holds and stores other items. These items do not have to be physical items but should include data or digital photos.

6. Mr. Smallwood chose to carry his cell phone on him while out in public. He took a risk of his personal property becoming public.

Try to think of other arguments for the cell phone search. Write these arguments on the note pad at your seat.

– The Cell Phone Search Case –

Supreme Court Justices - Questions for the Respondent

(for the cell phone search)

Directions: Justices ask questions to the attorneys to understand the arguments and to clarify any legal interpretations. Your job is to listen to both sets of arguments, ask questions for understanding, interpret the law presented and make a decision.

Justices may take notes, ask their own questions, use the questions below or reword them. Questions must be relevant to the case and to the attorney’s position that is arguing.

1. Since Mr. Smallwood was already handcuffed and the officers were not in danger, was this warrantless search necessary?

2. Explain how you think a cell phone like a container. The definition of a container is any object capable of holding another object.

3. Explain why this type of search – into a cell phone with no search warrant – is considered reasonable and fair.

4. Do you think Mr. Smallwood’s cell phone posed a threat to either of the search warrant exceptions – protecting the officer or destruction of evidence?

5. Are the police allowed to go “fishing” through our personal cell phone for evidence when someone is arrested?

6. If Mr. Smallwood had a password, do you think the police have the authority to force Mr. Smallwood to tell them the password to his phone if he had put a password on it, or would they need a search warrant first?

7. Don’t you think there could have been enough time to seize the cell phone first, hold on to it and then go get a search warrant to look at the images?

Try to think of other questions for the attorneys who are for the cell phone search.

MARSHAL’S SCRIPT

(You must call Court to order in a very loud voice.)

All rise.

Hear ye! Hear ye! Hear ye!

The Supreme Court of Florida is now in session.

All who have cause to plea, draw near, give attention, and you shall be heard.

God save these United States, this great State of Florida, and this honorable Court.

Ladies and gentlemen, the Florida Supreme Court.

Please be seated.

– The Cell Phone Search Case –

CHIEF JUSTICE’S SCRIPT

1. The Court is ready to hear the case of Smallwood v. State of Florida.

2. Are the attorneys ready to proceed?

(Wait for the attorneys to answer YES.)

3. Attorneys for the Petitioner may begin – 2 minutes each attorney.

(You now become a regular justice asking questions.

After both attorneys have their turn, move on to #4.)

___________

4. Attorneys for the Respondent may begin – 2 minutes each attorney.

(You now become a regular justice asking questions again.

After both attorneys have their turn, move on to #.5)

___________

5. Attorneys for the Petitioner may present rebuttal – 1 minute total.

(You now become a regular justice asking questions again.

After the petitioner’s attorney present their one minute rebuttal, move on to #6.)

___________

6. Attorneys, thank you for your arguments. The Court will announce its decision shortly.

CLERK SCRIPT

Directions: After the arguments, the Justices will vote on the case. Check the corresponding box for each justice’s vote, count the votes for the Petitioner and Respondent and complete the decision form below.

|Votes: |For the Petitioner: |For the Respondent: |

| | | |

|Chief Justice | | |

|Justice 2 | | |

|Justice 3 | | |

|Justice 4 | | |

|Justice 5 | | |

|Justice 6 | | |

|Justice 7 | | |

Decision Form:

(Directions – Stand up and READ in a very loud voice):

The Florida Supreme Court has reached a decision in this case. By a vote of _________ to __________ the Court rules in favor of the ___________________________.

-----------------------

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 persons or things to be seized.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download