Riley V. California Case Brief

The Riley V. California case focused on whether a phone search required a search warrant. According to Liptak, the issue was first brought to attention in 2009, with the arrest of David L. Riley in San Diego. The article, “Riley V. California”, explains the various issues taken into consideration by the supreme justices. The issues included were: the “warrantless search exception” that allows officers to search for anything that they feel threatens their safety, the justices introduced the issue that cellphones are like “minicomputers” and as Liptak writes, Justice Roberts believed that “the word cellphone is a misnomer” and could be considered many other things. Liptak also presents the issue that the ruling would apply to searches on various other things such as laptops and tablets. Moreover, the Fourth Amendment was a factor the Supreme Court had to thoroughly take into consideration. “Riley V. California” states the final ruling, as a unanimous decision that entailed …show more content…
The article introduces California Solicitor General Edward DuMont’s arguments: including that in the case of an arrest a police officer would be allowed to check a billfold, and that there is no difference between checking a phone or a billfold, “no warrant should be required for any information that is of the same sort that police have traditionally been able to seize without a warrant” such as a diary, that people have the “choice” to carry their cellphones with them, and “thus they have “no exception of privacy” if they are arrested,” and that a “cellphone can be searched as a tool to protect the police officer’s safety.” Deputy Solicitor General Michael Dreeben, also included in the article, "Supreme Court Considers Limits On Warrantless Cellphone Searches" argues “that the potential for destruction of evidence is