Supreme Court won’t review drug case text message search

October 5th, 2011

FAKE NEWS for the Zionist agenda

James Vicini
Reuters
October 5, 2011

The Supreme Court on Monday let stand a ruling that the police can search text messages from an arrested criminal suspect’s cell phone without obtaining a warrant.

The justices refused to review the California Supreme Court ruling that upheld the search on the grounds that defendants lose their privacy rights for any items they are carrying when taken into custody.

The Supreme Court rejected without comment an appeal by Gregory Diaz, who was convicted on drug charges. His attorneys said Supreme Court intervention was needed to resolve differing lower court rulings on how to apply precedent to warrantless searches of cell phone data.

Print this page.

Comment Rules

7 Responses to “Supreme Court won’t review drug case text message search”

Some kid in my brother’s class took ecstacy at the prom, he was caught, then his phone was taken and searched. They then rounded up his friends and took their cell phones, then this lead to taking more people and cell phones, leading to a large witch hunt. My brother says someone was even raided by police who didn’t go to the school. The school is upper middle class suburban, with an occasional fight between whoop doops who listen to rap music. Yet they have their own police force for the school, their own police cars, and even want to become their own public police force for the community around the school. This is an area that is part of a city, but sort of it’s own city, so we have County Sherrifs, State Police, City Police, and now Local School Police. Yet I live in a suburban area with little crime, so this burgeoning police force is basically only for harrassing young people and ruining their lives for smoking weed. These police are only control freaks and I know from a friend whose brother in law is a cop in the major city and they can’t stand our police, since they actually fight real crime.
- A suburban cop couldn’t make a patch on a city cop’s ass.
In other words we don’t have rights at all. It starts like this and then they will expended on it, i won’t be surprise after a lil time goes by then if you get arrested and you are in your house, the house it self would be theirs too.
Arresting you for drugs is unconstitutional. You haven’t woke u yet.
- unfortunately as long as its againt the law you can be arrested for it. If you dont like the Law the vote to change it.
  - oh and for the record The Federal government should be letting each individual state decide on the legality of anything. The only thing the Feds ought to be concerned with is wether or not you are paying the interstate commerce tax for selling it to someone in another state. If the damn Federal government would stay out of the common mans pocket (eliminate income tax) and only tax sales between states they wouldnt have to spend 24 billion a year on the DEA IF the Federal government would keep its nose out of business and just tax the hell out of imports no matter which company they come from they could keep the Military here and stop spending money like water they would have a budget surplus and this country wouild be safer and happier but sadly we live in a world of “hey we are politicians, lets pander to all the special interest till we go broke!”
I see nothing wrong with the Supreme courts decision. When you are arrested if they find dope on you, or any other contraband, you will be charged. Anything else they find on you, may be used as evidence in any crime you may have commited. There is nothing unreasonable about that. This is the first supposed controversial supreme court decision I have been aware of recently that actually follows the 4th amendment strictly to the letter. BRAVO Supreme court.