Hey guys, it's attorney Anthony Bandiero. Here, bring you another roadside chat. And this question comes from an officer in Nevada, and actually, he's a corrections officer in prison. And he brought a great a great scenario. Do prisoners have a reasonable expectation of privacy in cell phones? Right? 

So the scenario is an officer, you know, in prison, found a cell phone, searched it without a warrant, and, you know, saw some information that helped prove that the prisoner knew, you know, that he had it, you know, I guess he's trying to say, Oh, I have nothing to do with that cell phone. But, you know, the evidence inside the phone shows that he made calls to people associated with him and so forth. Alright. So normally, the prison would get a search warrant. But the question for us today is, do you need one? And the answer is no. Right? The answer is no. And the reason why is because the prisoner knows or should know that they cannot have that cell phone. Clearly, it's contraband, right. All the rules, say it no cell phones, they know or should know that that phone is absolutely prohibited in that facility. So, therefore, when they brought it in somehow or obtained it, they're possessing contraband. And generally speaking, a person does not have any reasonable expectation of privacy in contraband. A good example of that is a Supreme Court case called Illinois versus Kabbalists, where the Supreme Court said that a dog sniff in and of itself is not a Fourth Amendment search if it is trained to detect contraband, right. So in that case, the canine was run around a vehicle during a traffic stop, it alerted to the presence of contraband, and a search ensued on the probable cause. And Kabbalists lost that case because again, the dog is not searching under the Fourth Amendment. Well, it's the same concept applies here. When officers in the prison facility search contraband, it's not a search because it doesn't implicate the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. This is not even a search, right? Because it doesn't implicate it's not a protected item. Let me just give you an example from a case called United States versus bash. I have the Westlaw citation. It's 2021, w l 3207252. So again, 2000, what are 2021 WL that sounds for Westlaw, three to 07252. It's out of the Eastern Eastern District of California, it was decided actually very recently, July 29, 2029. So here's a case where corrections officers search a cell phone in a cell in a cell and the bash the prisoner is trying to complain about this search and saying that you guys needed a search warrant. And here's what the court said about that. It said. Moreover, it is well settled that prisoners have no reasonable expectation of privacy in the belongings they keep with them. The Fourth Amendment, prescription against unreasonable searches and searches does not apply within the confines of the prison cell. California prisoners are prohibited from possessing a cell phone. And thus, defendant bashe cannot claim to have had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents of the contraband cell phone, which he possessed and violation of the law. Well, I don't have the Nevada law in front of me, but I'm sure that either by regulation or directly by law, the prisoners in Nevada cannot have a cell phone that would be considered contraband. Again, the law can basically tell the Department of Corrections for you to decide what's contraband, what's not. And the DLC would then lay out that cell phones are included, you know, also found another very persuasive case. This case is called we bring it up here. It's called United States versus huart and it's huart as H.U.A.R.T let me just kind of explain what's going on here. So the citation by the way, is 735. F 3d 972. A case out of the Seventh Circuit decided in 2013 against you at unit United States versus Huart   735 f 3d 972.
What happened here is huart was part Have a rehabilitation facility, right, and halfway house. And so, it was controlled by the Bureau of Prisons. He knew that everything that he brought in there was subject to search, and so forth. So He's halfway right. He's not necessarily full-blown in prison. He's one foot in the prison and one foot into society. But there was this rule, and he is being controlled by corrections officers. And what's what the court said here is the defendant lacks. This is actually not what they said. This is a quote from Westlaw, how they digested the case, defendant lacked a reasonable expectation of privacy in a cell phone or its contents while living at a halfway house. And thus, the search that uncovered the phone and the images of child pornography stored on IT DID NOT implicate the Fourth Amendment. halfway house was under the operation, operational control of the Bureau of Prisons, house rules provided for the inventory of all items brought into the facility, defendant was not permitted to possess a cell phone, such that any phone he brought into the facility was contraband subject to search and confiscation. And rules governing inmates who were allowed to have a cell phone have cell phones specifically specified that they were subject to search at any time without reason. So Hart knew he wasn't supposed to have this phone because he was a child, no predator, but he had it anyway. And it got searched by a staff member; they found approximately 214 images, most of them child porn, he's going down for that. Okay, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. So any end, do corrections officers need a search warrant? Not in my view, is advisable to get when for other reasons. Short, there's all kinds of reasons why you'd want to get a search warrant. So but at the end of the day, should this show the evidence be suppressed? Because you're not a correctional officer not get a search warrant? Absolutely not? Absolutely not. And by the way, even, I'm just throwing this out there since we're having a nice conversation, even if there was a technical violation, which I don't think there is, but even if there was that evidence can still be used in other noncriminal forums, like parole, parole hearings, and so forth. So just one more little, you know, you can use them in admin hearings and, you know, internal discipline for the prison that actually doesn't have any fourth, you know, very little fourth member protections anyway. So, that's just another kind of sideline. Alright, guys, I hope it helped. Keep your questions coming. Do me a favor; it doesn't take much to hit like, subscribe and comment, share with your friends. Alright. And I hope I've helped you. Get it right—every time. See you next time.