Judge puts man in jail for refusing to unlock cellphones

[Nick Leduc]

This needs more attention. A few websites have picked it up.

TAMPA, Fla. (AP) — A Florida man is behind bars for failing to unlock his phones following a traffic stop.

Fox 13 News reports that William Montanez was pulled over in June for improper yielding in Tampa.

He wouldn't allow cops to search his car, so a drug-sniffing dog was brought in. A small amount of marijuana was allegedly found, and cops asked to search his cell phones.

Again, Montanez said no, so detectives got a warrant. His attorney calls it a "fishing expedition."

Judge Gregory Holder ruled Thursday cops could go through the cell phones, but Montanez said the two phones are new and he couldn't remember the passwords to unlock them.

The judge found him in civil contempt and threw him in jail.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-st...lock-cell-phones-for-police?int=undefined-rec

 

[igrace7092]

What exactly are the looking for on someone's phone? Are they going through the contacts hoping to find one with the name "My drug dealer"?

 

[Frizzle Fry]

In MA you now need a specific warrant for electronic devices; no fishing trips.

I.E. - "We have a witness saying he sent a text, we want access to texts and pictures" - "Sorry, you get a warrant for texts but NOT pictures".

 

[robjax]

yeah, thought the warrants had to be specific.

 

[amm5061]

In MA you now need a specific warrant for electronic devices; no fishing trips.

I.E. - "We have a witness saying he sent a text, we want access to texts and pictures" - "Sorry, you get a warrant for texts but NOT pictures".

Wasn't there a case about forcing someone to unlock their phone being a violation of the 5th amendment as well?

 

[Nick Leduc]

Wasn't there a case about forcing someone to unlock their phone being a violation of the 5th amendment as well?

I believe the judge ruled the defendant could tell his lawyer the PW and the lawyer could tell police and that wasnt in violation on his 5th.

 

[Prepper]

In MA you now need a specific warrant for electronic devices; no fishing trips.

I.E. - "We have a witness saying he sent a text, we want access to texts and pictures" - "Sorry, you get a warrant for texts but NOT pictures".

Then get a warrant for the other end of the text communications. Or go to the phone company if they are SMS. (I doubt most druggie are smart enough to use Signal
)

 

[CrackPot]

I believe the judge ruled the defendant could tell his lawyer the PW and the lawyer could tell police and that wasnt in violation on his 5th.

Sounds like an elected judge that failed out of law school

 

[Noreaster]

So moral of the story, if you are about to be detained, type in the wrong password 4 times. (i have a policy on my phone that 5 wrong passwords and the phone wipes itself out)

Sir, my password is 1234.

 

[Prepper]

This is the first case I recall hearing that did not involve a border crossing and the victim claims they can't remember the password (which was always going to be my defense if it happens to me). So..... I think I need a new plan.

 

[mbullism]

I believe the judge ruled the defendant could tell his lawyer the PW and the lawyer could tell police and that wasnt in violation on his 5th.

Wait, what? I guess he could. But what says he HAS to?

 

[M1911]

Odd. I thought this had been settled. Riley v. California - Wikipedia

 

[Toast]

Sir, my password is 1234.

That's amazing! I've got the same combination on my luggage!

 

[cams]

So let me get this straight, minor M/V infraction (civil), small amount of marijuana (pretty much legal now or a simple civil offense in most places) and thrown in jail because the guy won’t let them in his phone? Wtf??

Let’s just say for the sake of argument that this guy is a closet homosexual, and has incriminating photos or messages in his phone that are private to him and him alone, he doesn’t want it to get out, it’s nobody else’s business and his phone has zero to do with the civil charges mentioned according to the story.

But, we still have career criminals walking around free everywhere dealing, stealing and killing, but this poor bastard is in the can because he values his personal property and privacy??

This country is so f**ked up right now. lol

 

[jhblaze1]

So let me get this straight, minor M/V infraction (civil), small amount of marijuana (pretty much legal now or a simple civil offense in most places) and thrown in jail because the guy won’t let them in his phone? Wtf??

Let’s just say for the sake of argument that this guy is a closet homosexual, and has incriminating photos or messages in his phone that are private to him and him alone, it’s nobody else’s business and his phone has zero to do with the civil charges mentioned according to the story.

But, we still have career criminals walking around free everywhere dealing, stealing and killing, but this poor bastard is in the can because he values his personal property and privacy??

This country is so f**ked up right now. lol

this is one of those areas where the right shows how it can bejust as f***ed up and corrupt as lefties....Lawr and order republicans loathe the 4th.

 

[Noreaster]

Odd. I thought this had been settled. Riley v. California - Wikipedia

I believe the delta here is they actually got a warrant.
I am not sure on what grounds they got that warrant, seems like they had this guys number for a while now and was looking for the "in".

 

[Reptile]

Get the device that cracks the phone if they want to unlock it so much.

You never have to hand over your password.

What are the cops looking for anyway?

 

[eboos]

I believe the delta here is they actually got a warrant.
I am not sure on what grounds they got that warrant, seems like they had this guys number for a while now and was looking for the "in".

This

And the "news" article is extremely thin. Without a doubt there is much more to this story then what was in the article.

 

[M1911]

I believe the delta here is they actually got a warrant.
I am not sure on what grounds they got that warrant, seems like they had this guys number for a while now and was looking for the "in".

Ah. If they got a warrant and he refused to unlock them, then he's screwed -- textbook definition of contempt of court.

 

[cams]

Ah. If they got a warrant and he refused to unlock them, then he's screwed -- textbook definition of contempt of court.

The way the courts work these days I have nothing but contempt for them.

 

[Bonesinium]

Ah. If they got a warrant and he refused to unlock them, then he's screwed -- textbook definition of contempt of court.

You don't think there are clear 5th Amendment implications to this?

 

[Chevy 2 65]

Pot is an evil drug. Good thing they got all that pot off the street.

 

[drgrant]

this is one of those areas where the right shows how it can bejust as f***ed up and corrupt as lefties....Lawr and order republicans loathe the 4th.

HurrDurrpublicans hate the 4th, but Lefties hate it too, albeit secretly. Whens the last time a moonbat held a rally about civil asset forfeiture? lol... " oh wait those victims had money, f*** the rich!!!!" etc lol. They only like it when the 4th is abused against a protected class of the month.

 

[cams]

@ Chevy 2 65 ^^^^ It’s only bad if the .gov isn’t getting their filthy hands on the money from it.

Our government at work:

We get more money=All good.
We get no money=Nope. Make it illegal.

 

[ToddDubya]

Keep a burner in your car that never gets used and hand that over upon request?

 

[BUMPA01603]

Reminds me of that UMass Worcester doctor a couple years ago they caught in the ladies bathroom taking up skirt photos of the students on his cell phone from the next stall. Police couldn't unlock his phone and he wouldn't give them his password. I think it's still an open case? Last I heard the judge ordered him to supply the password. He's a POS for sure...

 

[Nick Leduc]

Ah. If they got a warrant and he refused to unlock them, then he's screwed -- textbook definition of contempt of court.

The problem is (from the details of the case that has been released) is that the search warrant is BS in itself. As @cams pointed out, they pulled him over on a small civil infraction. Then go after the pot. When does it end. I saw an interview where his lawyer is now arguing that the warrant is unjust.
The bigger problem is Judges that stand behind the boys in blue that are still stuck on the war on pot.

 

[Bonesinium]

Quite frankly, I don't think it matters if the warrant was the textbook definition of a valid warrant issued upon probable cause. Not much of a right to remain silent if you can be jailed for remaining silent. Do you now have to assist the police in making against yourself? What information do you have to give next without being in contempt and jailed for? I mean you quickly end up where you are forced to confess to crimes or be in contempt. Yes, I think the slope is that slippery.

 

[Mikel131]

4th The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

 

[rommel]

So let me get this straight, minor M/V infraction (civil), small amount of marijuana (pretty much legal now or a simple civil offense in most places) and thrown in jail because the guy won’t let them in his phone? Wtf??

Let’s just say for the sake of argument that this guy is a closet homosexual, and has incriminating photos or messages in his phone that are private to him and him alone, he doesn’t want it to get out, it’s nobody else’s business and his phone has zero to do with the civil charges mentioned according to the story.

But, we still have career criminals walking around free everywhere dealing, stealing and killing, but this poor bastard is in the can because he values his personal property and privacy??

This country is so f**ked up right now. lol

I am thinking that a ballsy reply to the judge would be;

"Your honor, I have naked pictures of your wife on my phone and I do not feel like I would get a fair trial if they were uncovered"