It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ohio court: Cell phone searches require warrant

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Ohio court: Cell phone searches require warrant


www.msnbc.msn.com

COLUMBUS, Ohio - Police officers must obtain a search warrant before scouring the contents of a suspect's cell phone unless their safety is in danger, a divided Ohio Supreme Court ruled Tuesday on an issue that appears never to have reached another state high court or the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Ohio high court ruled 5-4 in favor of Antwaun Smith, who was arrested on drug charges after he answered a cell phone call from a crack coc aine user acting as a police informant.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 03:46 PM
link   
Well this is win for Liberals and all those who actually value their right to privacy.

Finally, the police will need a warrant to grab info out of your cell phone.

I wonder how this will effect schools and confiscating cell phones and then punishing students for the contents?

We were discussing this in a thread just last week.

Thoughts Anybody?

~Keeper

www.msnbc.msn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


I work at an elementary school so perhaps cell phone use is more of a problem for upper grades.

When I confiscate a cell phone because its being used in class, I make the parent come and get it. That way I can talk to them about the appropriatness of cell phones during school hours. Usually the parent just comes that once and the child never has a problem again.

As far as I'm concerned, I never look at the messages or phone numbers the child was accessing. I don't think other teachers I work with do, either. But again, this might be more of a problem with the older students.

It probably would fall under the same guidelines as searching a child's backpack or locker. If a teacher/principal suspects illegal activity or items, or has reason to fear for the child's safety, then they can search.

Just my thoughts. Have a great day!



posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


Very glad to hear this. Can't imagine someone confiscating my personal cell and helping themselves to it. Common sense dictates there is something wrong with that.

As far as public schools are concerned, this may remain to be seen. They have some rights as "In Loco Parentis", or in place of the parent, which could conceivably give them some rights to a student's cell phone.

No doubt this conflict will develop sooner or later, and may require further interpretation of the "In Loco Parentis" powers.



posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by smyleegrl
 


Thanks for the info. I didn't know that you would really even have to deal with cell phones at the elementary level, my kids sure didn't get one until about 14 or so.

But I would assume that it's a good way for parents to keep their kids safe and good on you for doing the right thing and educating the parents verses just punishing the student.

~Keeper



posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by ladyinwaiting
 


I agree, my personnal property is just that personal. And my kids would feel the same having raised them as being question asking, intelligent young adults.

Thanks for the input, and I hope they do sit down and have a serious discussion about the rights of the student and the teacher. Mind you I want them to be able to make our schools a safe and productive place, but we must limit the ability of those teachers to overstep those bounds and get away with it.

~Keeper



posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 04:13 PM
link   
Ohio is a little behind the times, on this one. A search warrant has been required for "stored electronic information and/or communications" for quite a long time. I'll have to go back in some of my training manuals to find the case law, but I'll find it and post it here. I know it has been a requirement for at least 15 years.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join