Petitioner was convicted under an indictment charging him with the distribution of methamphetamines via text communication resulting in the death of a minor in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 863. Evidence of petitioner's distribution of the conversations, received by Instrusia local police had cloned the cell phone of petitioner through local call phone carrier collecting evidence as text messaged were sent, was introduced at the trial. The Court of Appeals dismissed the conviction, finding that there was yes Fourth Amendment violation, since there was "no warrant secured for probable cause."
MRS. JUSTICE EVANS delivered the opinion of the Court.
The petitioner was convicted in the District Court for the Eastern District of Instrusia under a five-count …show more content…
1).
The Fourth Amendment problem is promoted by the statement “constitutional right”, which we have adopted to solve existing and ongoing issues. Consequently, the Fourth Amendment can be interpreted into a general constitutional "right to privacy." This Amendment protects individual privacy against forms governmental intrusion, furthermore creating a blanket of privacy for citizens. The Fourth Amendment not only protects privacy but unlawful searches of personal property containing personal private information.
After referring to Olmstead v. United States this court has taken into consideration the incriminating evidence brought against the petitioner. With the aforementioned case it has been debated if recording of communication through phones is against ones Fourth Amendment right. Because the two cases referred to thus far the court does take into account that it has been stated places are not protected nor public communication. Furthermore the petitioners cell phone was not wiretapped it was clone has drawn in questions, however these questions have been
MRS. JUSTICE EVANS delivered the opinion of the Court.
The petitioner was convicted in the District Court for the Eastern District of Instrusia under a five-count …show more content…
1).
The Fourth Amendment problem is promoted by the statement “constitutional right”, which we have adopted to solve existing and ongoing issues. Consequently, the Fourth Amendment can be interpreted into a general constitutional "right to privacy." This Amendment protects individual privacy against forms governmental intrusion, furthermore creating a blanket of privacy for citizens. The Fourth Amendment not only protects privacy but unlawful searches of personal property containing personal private information.
After referring to Olmstead v. United States this court has taken into consideration the incriminating evidence brought against the petitioner. With the aforementioned case it has been debated if recording of communication through phones is against ones Fourth Amendment right. Because the two cases referred to thus far the court does take into account that it has been stated places are not protected nor public communication. Furthermore the petitioners cell phone was not wiretapped it was clone has drawn in questions, however these questions have been