A federal court ruled that police can compel parolees to unlock their phones by physically using their thumbprints. On April 17, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the conviction of Jeremy Travis Payne, who was stopped for a traffic violation in 2021 that led to charges of drug possession and distribution.
Point phone camera here
Payne, on parole for assaulting an officer, had his phone unlocked by officers using his thumbprint during the stop without a warrant, as allowed by his parole conditions. The search revealed videos that led to additional charges.
One video, filmed hours before the stop, showed a room with cash, suspected fentanyl pills and a money-counting machine. Another showed a house and a BMW.
Officers traced a home address from Payne’s phone. The Coachella Valley Violent Crime Gang Task Force entered the residence using his keys and seized over 800 pills.
Payne was indicted for possession with intent to distribute fentanyl and cocaine.His lawyers contended that requiring him to unlock his phone constituted a “compelled testimonial communication,” breaching his Fourth Amendment protection from unreasonable searches and seizures, as well as his Fifth Amendment safeguard against self-incrimination.
However, the court noted Payne’s parole conditions allowed warrantless searches and reduced his expectations of privacy.
Court documents indicate that when a search warrant application contains illegally obtained information, a reviewing court must decide if the warrant still has probable cause after removing the inadmissible facts.
Citing United States v. Bishop, the district court found that excluding the facts discovered during an illegal sweep, the warrant still had probable cause. Payne acknowledged in his reply brief that the remaining information from his phone would likely have sufficed to establish probable cause, even without the facts obtained during the illegal sweep.
Tags: California, California Highway Patrol, Drug smuggling, Fentanyl, Police officers, Smartphones, Supreme Court
[LAUREN TAYLOR]
A FEDERAL COURT RULED THAT POLICE OFFICERS CAN COMPEL PAROLEES TO UNLOCK THEIR PHONES, EVEN BY PHYSICALLY REQUIRING THEM TO PRESS THEIR THUMBS AGAINST THE DEVICE IF NEEDED — LIKENING IT TO A FINGERPRINT TAKEN AT BOOKING.
IN A CONTROVERSIAL RULING LAST WEEK, THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS UPHELD THE CONVICTION OF JEREMY TRAVIS PAYNE FOLLOWING A 2021 TRAFFIC STOP THAT LED TO DRUG POSSESSION AND DISTRIBUTION CHARGES.
PAYNE WAS ON PAROLE AT THE TIME DUE TO A PREVIOUS CONVICTION FOR ASSAULTING A PEACE OFFICER.
DURING THE TRAFFIC STOP, OFFICERS UNLOCKED PAYNE’S CELL PHONE USING HIS THUMBPRINT WITHOUT A WARRANT — AN ACTION HIS PAROLE CONDITIONS ALLOWED. THE SEARCH REVEALED VIDEOS AND OTHER DATA LEADING TO FURTHER CHARGES.
OFFICERS DISCOVERED TWO NOTABLE VIDEOS ON PAYNE’S PHONE. THE FIRST — FILMED HOURS BEFORE THE TRAFFIC STOP — SHOWED A ROOM FILLED WITH CASH, SUSPECTED FENTANYL PILLS, AND A MONEY COUNTING MACHINE. THE SECOND VIDEO SHOWED A HOUSE AND A PARKED BMW.
AFTER FINDING A SUSPECTED HOME ADDRESS ON THE PHONE’S MAP, OFFICERS DROVE TO THE LOCATION AND USED PAYNE’S KEYS TO ENTER THE RESIDENCE WHERE THEY SEIZED OVER 800 PILLS.
PAYNE WAS INDICTED FOR POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE FENTANYL AND COCAINE.
PAYNE’S ATTORNEYS ARGUED THAT FORCING HIM TO UNLOCK HIS PHONE CONSTITUTED “COMPELLED TESTIMONIAL COMMUNICATION” — VIOLATING THE FOURTH AMENDMENT’S PROTECTION AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND SEIZURES — AS WELL AS THE FIFTH AMENDMENT’S PROTECTION AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION.
ACCORDING TO PAYNE’S ATTORNEYS, FORCIBLY ACCESSING SOMEONE’S PHONE PROVIDES INSIGHT INTO THEIR ENTIRE LIFE. BRIEF ACCESS CAN UNCOVER SENSITIVE INFORMATION THAT USUALLY REQUIRES A WARRANT, LIKE CALL AND TEXT RECORDS OR TRAVEL HISTORY.
HOWEVER THE COURT RULED AGAINST PAYNE, NOTING THAT HIS PAROLE CONDITIONS ALLOWED FOR WARRANTLESS SEARCHES AND SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED HIS EXPECTATIONS OF PRIVACY. PAYNE WAS SENTENCED TO 12 YEARS IN PRISON.
Straight to your inbox.
By entering your email, you agree to the Terms & Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.
