The Riley vs. California brings up a lot of controversial topics and questions on the issue of cell phones being searched with or without a warrant. In my personal opinion I do think it is a good idea that the police cannot search anyone's cellphone without a warrant. I believe it is a violation of the fourth amendment. Although cellphones obviously aren't specified in The Constitution I think of cellphones as being forms of documents, letters, personal files. Just as the Chief Justice says cellphones "just as easily be called cameras, video players, Rolodexes, calendars, tape recorders, libraries, diaries, albums, televisions, maps or newspapers." Just as paper documents and files cannot be searched without a warrant, neither should the messages and photos be searched on your PERSONAL device. In case where searching someone's cell phone can save a life, then a warrant less search may be alright. If it is just to bring a criminal to justice, then the police should either get a warrant or find other evidence to convict a criminal. There is no way of "remote wiping" a cell phone, as the Court called it. The evidence of a phone can be erased but it also can be recovered by computer analysts. The police can wait in a situation that is not dire to obtain a warrant and search the phone. So overall, I do agree with the Courts ruling to overturn Riley's conviction.
