Local authorities react to Supreme Court decision on cellphone searches

Staff report

YOUNGSTOWN

Mahoning County Prosecutor Paul J. Gains said Wednesday’s unanimous U.S. Supreme Court decision that police generally must have a search warrant to search an arrestee’s cellphone won’t be much of an impediment to law enforcement or criminal prosecutions.

That’s because if police have probable cause that the phone is related to a crime, they can seize and hold it to ensure that it isn’t destroyed or tampered with until they can get a search warrant a few hours or a day later to search the phone’s contents.

The greatest inconvenience of the search-warrant requirement is likely the delay in return of the phone to its owner while police await a search warrant for the phone, Gains said.

“The people who suffer are the owners of the phone, unless they tell the officer, ‘OK. I don’t want you to take my phone. Go ahead and look, because I wasn’t doing anything,’” Gains explained.

“They’re treating cellphones now like they’re treating the computers. You’ve got to get a search warrant to get into them because of the expectation of privacy,” Gains said of the top court justices.

“Cellphones today — the modern technology — makes it easier for criminals to do their trade, whatever crime it is — narcotics, organized crime or whatever it would be,” said Maj. William Cappabianca of the Mahoning County Sheriff’s Office.

“But, as law-enforcement officers, we have to respect the decision of the court,” he added. “We will still, ultimately, end up with the information that’s on the mobile device, but our means of getting it will be more labor-intensive” because a search warrant will have to be obtained from the court of jurisdiction, he explained.

Boardman Police Chief Jack Nichols said the court decision is not likely to impact his department.

Read more reaction from local law enforcement in Friday's Vindicator or on Vindy.com.