Conficating Mobile Phone Data
Should the police be allowed to
dig through people's cell phones?
Police officers in California have a new way to
If they arrest
someone who is carry .cell phone, officers can
dig through the phone's content,
including text messages. voice mails, c-mails, calendars,
In a 5-2 ruling, the California Supreme Court
stated in December 2011 that police
officers are allowed to
"open and examine what they find"
on an arrested person, without a warrant.
A warrant is permission from
a judge based on reasonable
The decision came about as a result of a 2007 case,
People v. Diaz.
Sheriffs in California's Ventura County
arrested Gregory Diaz
saying they saw him participate
in a drug deal.
took Dials cell phone from his pocket
through the text messages.
They found one linking Diaz to the sale.
Diaz was convicted
Later, however, he appealed the charges.
He said that phone snooping
violated the Fourth Amendment, which protects
against unreasonable searches and
The California Supreme Court's
The court stated that,
based on past rulings from the U.S.
Supreme Court, police can indeed look through anything
"immediately associated with a person."
The two judges who voted against the verdict
argued that cell phone searches
are an invasion of privacy.
They noted that smart phones
can contain a wide variety
of information about a person.
Here are the arguments
from people on both sides.
Protection Over Privacy
need help keeping the streets safe,
say supporters of cell phone searches.
Officers in Shafter. California
note that the policy has already been helpful.
"We were able to establish
arrested people were in contact with.
It helped us to find who may also be involved
in that crime," Detective Chris Crider said.
Some people also believe that the policy
people from committing crimes.
"The police now have better means
to find out
if you're guilty
California resident Chris Eddy
told San Diego News.
Furthermore, supporters of the ruling say
it does not
the Fourth Amendment.
If you've already been
arrested with reasonable evidence,
they say, then it is fair for the police
to search through anything on you.
Abuse of Power
through smart phones.
argue opponents of the new ruling.
"People could have so much information
on their phones
that they don't want somebody else to see,
and it would be an invasion of privacy
not only for them,
but the other person also,"
Valinten Perez said.
San Diego resident Jim Tharayil
added that he thinks the policy could be
He told San Diego New that he can
imagine police officers "using something else
to pull you over
and then using this to
your cell phone." Justice Kathryn M. Werdegar,
one of the judges who opposed the decision,
says that police officers should
have to obtain a warrant.
It is unfair of police officers to
through the wealth of personal
business information that can be carried
on a mobile phone merely
because the device was taken from
an arested person.
The Supreme Court ruled in June 2014
that cell phones can no longer he searched
without a warrant
(This ruling came
after this text was first published )
2 Questions for Class
Which amendment protects against
unreasonable searches and
- the First Amendment
- the Second Amendment
- the Third Amendment
- the Fourth Amendment
According to the passage.
all of these people are against the
police being allowed to
cell phones EXCEPT
- Detective Chris Cinder
- Justice Kathryn M. Werdegar
- Valinten Perez
- Gregory Diaz
What can you most likely
conclude about Gregory Diaz
after reading the passage?
"Diaz was convicted.
In this sentence,
the word convicted means
- He was probably sentenced to jail.
- He wasn't actually guilty of any crime.
- He was related to one of the judges.
- He used to work as
a police officer.
- reported angry
- acted alone
- looked after
- found guilty
- The author's purpose for writing this
passage was all of the following
- to present evidence
for both sides of the argument
- to let the reader come
to his or her own
- to provide facts
about the 2007
case People v. Diaz
- to offer convincing
proof that one side
is clearly right
- Why did sheriffs arrest Gregory Diaz?
- Why is the People v. Diaz case important?
How do you know? Give specific examples
from the text to support your answer.
3 Leon's Questions
- Can you find any words that usually have
a different pronunciation in the United States, when
ccompared to English spoken in the UK?
4 Leon's Grammar Focus
In traditional British English the verb
to appeal is not
transitive in this usage.
We would prefer to say "Appeal against