Legal Opinion

State v. Smith

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 2009No. 2008-1781PublishedCited by 124 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLanzinger, J.

{¶ 1} In this appeal concerning the scope of federal protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, we are asked to determine whether the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the warrantless search of data within a cell phone when the phone is lawfully seized incident to an arrest. Given the particular facts of this case, we hold that the trial court improperly admitted the call record and phone numbers from appellant’s phone. We therefore reverse and remand to the trial court for a new trial.

I. Case Background

{¶ 2} On January 21, 2007, Wendy Thomas Northern…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Coolidge v. New HampshireSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  3. Chimel v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  4. Rakas v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  5. United States v. RobinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1973

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by124 opinions

  1. State of Texas v. Granville, AnthonyCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2014
  2. United States v. WurieCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2013
  3. State v. CastagnolaOhio Supreme Court · 2015
  4. United States v. Flores-LopezCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2012
  5. State v. HintonWashington Supreme Court · 2014

119 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API