In the case of RILEY v. CALIFORNIA, David Riley was routinely stopped by a police officer for driving with an expired registration. During this stop the officer also learned that Riley’s license had been suspended. The officer conducted an inventory search of the car after impounding it as procedure calls for. Riley was arrested for possession of a concealed and loaded firearm after finding two handguns under the hood of his car. The officer also ended up finding some items associated with the bloods gang. He furthermore confiscated a cell phone from Riley’s pant pocket. The officer accessed evidence on the phone and observed that a few of the words were preceded by the initials CK that he assumed could stand for Crip killers a slang term for the gang he is in. At the police station about 2 hours afterward a detective that’s main study was on gangs, furthermore reviewed the contents of Riley’s cell phone. The detective stated that he checked Riley’s phone to look for evidence because gang members will frequently record themselves with guns or take photos. Though there was quite a bit of “stuff ” on the phone a certain file is what caught his eye. They also ended up finding pictures of Riley standing in front of a car they believed had happened to be …show more content…
He argued that the searches of his phone violated the Fourth Amendment since there was no warrant involved. But the trial court rejected the argument at trial, police officers testified about the photographs and videos and a few of the photographs were admitted o evidence. Riley was sentenced on all 3 counts and received an increased sentence of 15 to life. The court trusted on the Fourth Amendment, which permits a warrantless search of cell phone data incident to an arrest, so as long as the cell phone was immediately connected with the arrestee’s person. The Court ended up rejecting Riley’s request for a case