funsec mailing list archives
Re: California opts out of 4th Amendment
From: Larry Seltzer <larry () larryseltzer com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 17:08:30 -0500
If you're carrying a briefcase with some papers in it can they read the papers? It's the same thing. LJS -----Original Message----- From: funsec-bounces () linuxbox org [mailto:funsec-bounces () linuxbox org] On Behalf Of Paul Ferguson Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2011 2:41 AM To: rMslade () shaw ca Cc: funsec () linuxbox org Subject: Re: [funsec] California opts out of 4th Amendment -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Rob, grandpa of Ryan, Trevor, Devon & Hannah <rMslade () shaw ca> wrote:
California: *All* data on *all* devices you carry is subject to warrantless search http://bit.ly/ep9OUC+ "On Monday, the California Supreme Court ruled that police in that state can search the contents of an arrested person's cell phone. "Citing U.S. Supreme Court precedents, the ruling contends that The loss of privacy upon arrest extends beyond the arrestee's body to include 'personal property ... immediately associated with the person of the arrestee' at the time of arrest."
Actually, it is a reasonable judgment -- and I'm saying that as a libertarian-leaning left-wing liberal. :-) When arrested, law enforcement already has the privilege -- under the law - -- to inspect all personal belongings on the suspect in the normal course of the investigation. Searching a digital device is a natural extension of this privilege. having said that, there is a huge difference in obtaining that data in the course of an arrest, and whether that data should be held if charges are dropped or the suspect is vindicated, etc. I suspect that legal challenges to certain facets of these scenarios will be forthcoming. - - ferg p.s. And there is nothing "common" about California, I assure you. :-) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Desktop 9.5.3 (Build 5003) wj8DBQFNJXIUq1pz9mNUZTMRAsTMAKC90mLm53G4uhWKhOeHnfdwqvB5/QCePpTO t8+/tEmDUXQpMc9NRg6ADoc= =EV3c -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawgster(at)gmail.com ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list. _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
Current thread:
- California opts out of 4th Amendment Rob, grandpa of Ryan, Trevor, Devon & Hannah (Jan 05)
- Re: California opts out of 4th Amendment Paul Ferguson (Jan 06)
- Re: California opts out of 4th Amendment David M Chess (Jan 06)
- Re: California opts out of 4th Amendment Larry Seltzer (Jan 06)
- Re: California opts out of 4th Amendment Jeff Kell (Jan 06)
- Re: California opts out of 4th Amendment Paul Ferguson (Jan 06)
- Re: California opts out of 4th Amendment John Bambenek (Jan 06)
- Re: California opts out of 4th Amendment Chris Boyd (Jan 07)
- Re: California opts out of 4th Amendment der Mouse (Jan 08)
- Re: California opts out of 4th Amendment Paul Ferguson (Jan 06)
- Re: California opts out of 4th Amendment Chris Boyd (Jan 07)
- Re: California opts out of 4th Amendment Jeffrey Walton (Jan 07)
- Re: California opts out of 4th Amendment Paul Ferguson (Jan 06)
- Re: California opts out of 4th Amendment Gary Buhrmaster (Jan 07)
- Re: California opts out of 4th Amendment Nick FitzGerald (Jan 08)