|
Library
|
Your profile |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.|
Law and Politics
Reference:
Okonenko R.I.
Examination of a portable electronic device in the course
of a search of an arrestee within the US criminal procedural law:
attempt to fi nd a balance of interest of citizens and the state
// Law and Politics.
2014. ¹ 12.
P. 1917-1920.
URL: https://en.nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=52329
Okonenko R.I. Examination of a portable electronic device in the course of a search of an arrestee within the US criminal procedural law: attempt to fi nd a balance of interest of citizens and the stateAbstract: This article describes the main problems, which the US courts face while examining the portable digital devices of arrestees, and analyzes the differences between the modern information technologies and conventional methods of storing information (planner, briefcase, etc.). This leads to the conclusion that the American legislation is unable to implement the traditional legal standards towards the electronic carriers of personal data. A special attention is given to the analysis of the decision of the United States Supreme Court from June 25th 2014, which finds mobile phones to be a significant personal object, and their search can only be conducted based on a separate court warrant. The author also describes the key points of view of American legislators on the question of to what extent can an examination of a portable digital device of a suspect be conducted by a member of law enforcement in order to address both, the public interest of fighting crime and private interest of a citizen by protecting the important personal information. The main conclusion of the research consist in the incomparability of the modern communication devices to the traditional means of writing down information, which used to be the basis of the work of American courts of all levels. Keywords: Electronic evidence, digital evidence, protection of personal data, personal secrets, search of a computer, examination of a mobile device, pat-down, US law, US criminal process.
This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article
References
1. Bernam U. Pravovaya sistema SShA. M. 2006. – 1216 s.
2. Adam M.G. The iphone meets the fourth amendment. // UCLA Law Review. 2008. Vol. 27. – P. 27-58. 3. Bailie M.V., Hagen E., Judish N., Marshall J.H. Searching and seizing computers and obtaining electronic evidence in criminal investigations. Washington, 2009. – 287 r. 4. Brown P. Searches of cell phones incident to arrest: overview of the law as it stands and a new path forward. // Harvard Journal of Law and Technology. 2014. Vol. 27. – P. 563-586. 5. Chang R.M. Why the plain view doctrine should not apply to digital evidence // Journal of Trial and Appellate Advocacy. Vol. XII. 2010. – P. 31-67. 6. Nelson J.C. United states v. Robinson, 414 U.S. 218 (1973). // Akron Law Review. 1974. Vol. 7:3. – P. 499-507. 7. Pincus A. Evolving technology and fourth amendment: the implication of Riley v. California. // Cato Supreme Court Review. 2014. – P. 307-336. 8. Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 2014. – 28 p. 9. Starbuck J.L. Redefining searches incident to arrest: Gant’s Effect on Chimel. // Penn State Law Review. 2012. Vol. 116:4. – P. 1253-1280. 10. U.S. Supreme Court’s Cellphone Ruling Is a Major Victory for Privacy. // Newsweek. [Electronic resource]. URL: (last access 28.11.2014). |
© 1998 – 2024 Nota Bene. Publishing Technologies. NB-Media Ltd.
