Riley v. California
United States Supreme Court
Police generally must obtain a warrant before searching the digital contents of a cell phone seized incident to a lawful arrest.
Case Summary
Riley v. California is the Supreme Court's landmark ruling on digital privacy, unanimously holding that police must obtain a warrant before searching a cell phone seized during an arrest. The Court rejected the government's argument that a cell phone search falls within the traditional "search incident to arrest" exception.
Background
David Riley was stopped for a traffic violation. Police seized his smartphone and, without a warrant, searched it — finding evidence linking him to a gang-related shooting.
Why It Matters
Chief Justice Roberts acknowledged that 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."