BLOG BULLETS: Riley v. California’s concern about the grossly more intrusive nature of cell phone and computer searches applies equally in the border search context. While a traveler has a diminished expectation of privacy at the border, the arrestees in Riley had a diminished expectation of privacy as arrestees, and the purposes of the border […]
Read/Write CommentsBLOG BULLETS: In Riley v. California, the Supreme Court held that cell phones couldn’t be searched as part of a search incident to arrest. The Court emphasized the far greater amount of information on a cell phone and the resulting far greater intrusion on privacy when a cell phone is searched. This reasoning suggests either […]
Read/Write CommentsBLOG BULLETS: A document the government seeks to offer in a reopening of its case in chief is covered by the Rule 16(a)(1)(E)(ii) obligation to disclose all documents to be offered in the case in chief, just like documents the government offers in its initial presentation of evidence. The “materiality” threshold for the Rule 16(a)(1)(E)(i) […]
Read/Write CommentsBLOG BULLETS: In an appropriate case, you can compel the government to grant one of your witnesses immunity if the witness claims the privilege against self-incrimination. The witness’s testimony has to be relevant, but the relevance need only be “minimal.” The second requirement is that the government’s denial of immunity to the defense witness have […]
Read/Write Comments