Legal Opinion

Katelin Eunjoo Seo v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided August 21, 2018No. Court of Appeals Case 29A05-1710-CR-2466PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Mathias, Judge.

[1] Smartphones are ubiquitous in modern life. See Riley v. California , --- U.S. ----, 134 S.Ct. 2473 , 2484, 189 L.Ed.2d 430 (2014) ("[M]odern cell phones, ... are now such a pervasive and insistent part of daily life that the proverbial visitor from Mars might conclude they were an important feature of human anatomy."). The amount of personal information contained on a typical smartphone is astounding: photographs, contacts, emails, text messages, not to mention the personal information that is contained in widely used smartphone *420 social-media applications such as Facebook,…

Also in this document: Dissent.

2Cases cited39 opinions

  1. Payton v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  2. Schmerber v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  3. Boyd v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  4. Kastigar v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  5. Fisher v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. People v. SpicerAppellate Court of Illinois · 2019
  2. Katelin Eunjoo Seo v. State of IndianaIndiana Supreme Court · 2020

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

Powered by the Exa API