Legal Rights and Technology Karina Garner

1. Legal Rights and TechnologyKarina Garner

2. Technology • Technology innovations are being used by Police Officers as well as criminals • Police Officers are relaying more on cellphones and computers to fight crime • Criminals are using cellphones and computers as a new weapon

3. Criminals and Technology • Criminals are using cellphones and computers to contact their allies, store incriminating information and attack victims. • Drug dealers use cellphones to communicate with clients and associates. • Sex deviants use cellphones and computers to store pornography. • Terrorist can use cellphones and computers to plan terrorist attacks.

4. Law Enforcement and Technology • Law Enforcement can use computers to track criminal activity. • Cellphones and computers can store criminal evidence; call history, location, contacts, text messages and e-mails. • Photos and videos (stored in cellphones) can help law enforcement agents solve crimes. • Recent terrorist attacks have been solved thanks to pictures taken by ordinary citizens

5. Searches, Seizures and the Right to Privacy • The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. • Searches and seizures involve the right to privacy. • Reasonable expectation of privacy is expected by everyone, including those who use electronic devices to communicate. • Information that is put out in the open does not guarantee privacy.

6. “My House” • On the evening of September 5, 2007, BrimaWurie was arrested by the Boston Police Department for selling crack to Fred Wade. • While at the police station, one of Wurie’s cellphone kept receiving call from a number identified, on the caller-ID, as “My house.” • Police officers checked the call log, obtained the phone number and used white pages to find the home address. • Wurie informed police officers gave the police officers a different home address. • Officers went to the house, on the white pages and found 215 grams of cocaine, a firearm, ammunition, four bags of marijuana, drug paraphernalia and $250 in cash.

7. U.S. v Wurie • Wurie was sentenced to 21 years in prison. • Wurie filed a motion arguing that the evidence was obtained as a result of the warrantless search of his cell phone. • The court denied the motion as an evidentiary hearing was unnecessary. • According to the government, the right to privacy does apply in this case as Wurie’s cell phone was not protected with a password.

8. Lawful Arrests • A warrantless search is unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment unless the arrest was lawful. • When a lawful arrest is made, police officers have the right o search the arrestee’s person and the area within his immediate control. • Wurie was carrying two cell phones, at the time of the arrest. • Wurie’s arrest was lawful, therefore; the search of his cell phone was legal.

9. Wurie’s Cell Phone • After officers interviewed Wade, they became aware that Wurie was a drug dealer. • The government argues that the officer knew the content of the cell phone; data. • The search of a cell phone is necessary to prevent the destruction of data. • Currently technology allows for data to be remotely deleted.

10. Opinions • The use of electronic devices is becoming inevitable. • Even though citizen expect the right to privacy the reality is the Constitution does not protect our “electronic devices.” • Information that we share, electronically, can be subject to search and seizure. • The Right to Privacy ended when internet, social media and cell phones were invented.

11. Discussion Questions • Does the Constitution protects cell phones, computers or any technical device? • Should there be a difference between seizing a cell phone from an individual’s person or from a house or a car? • When it comes to searching cell phones or computers are search warrants required? • Can technical innovation overwrite the Right to Privacy?