Vogel Law Firm
  • Home
  • Professionals
  • Practice Areas
  • Blog
  • Careers
  • Client Portal
  • Testimonials
  • Contact

call us today
866-771-9930

  • Home
  • Professionals
  • Blog
  • Careers
  • Client Portal
  • Testimonials
  • Contact
  • X Close
CONTACT

BLOG

Are You Required to Unlock Your Cell Phone if Directed by Law Enforcement?

by Vogel Law Firm | Jul 8, 2020 | Criminal Defense

By Drew Hushka

Can law enforcement order a person to unlock his or her phone or electronic device?  That question has perplexed courts for years.  Generally, a search warrant allows law enforcement to search a device without violating the Fourth Amendment.  But, as countless legal procedurals have informed the public, the Fifth Amendment grants persons the “right to remain silent.”  Does compelling a person to unlock a device prevent that person from remaining “silent” in violation of the Fifth Amendment?

Courts have near-uniformly determined requiring a person to unlock a device is compelled speech.  But, despite the right to remain silent under the Fifth Amendment, that does not end the inquiry.  Under the “foregone conclusion” doctrine, law enforcement can compel speech without violating the Fifth Amendment if the content of the speech is a foregone conclusion—if law enforcement independently knows the answer.

But how does the foregone conclusion doctrine apply to unlocking devices?  Courts fall into two separate camps when assessing what is communicated when a person is compelled to unlock a device.  In the first camp, courts find a person unlocking a device only communicates that they know the password.  Accordingly, such courts hold law enforcement can require a person to unlock a device if they can independently establish the person knows the password.

In the second camp, courts find unlocking a device implicitly communicates more than mere knowledge of a password; it also communicates control of the device and its contents.  Accordingly, courts in the second camp only permit law enforcement to compel the unlocking of a device if law enforcement can independently prove the person: (1) knows the password, (2) controls the device, and (3) controls the content of the device.

The importance of these separate is what is known as a “circuit split.”  Because the separate camps apply the Fifth Amendment differently, and because a person’s rights under the United States Constitution should be equal regardless location, the United States Supreme Court is more likely to issue a definitive ruling when high courts reach differing conclusions.  In Seo v. State, the Indiana Supreme Court—the highest state court in Indiana—recently established residence in the second camp, splitting from other jurisdictions.  This split increases the chance the United States Supreme Court may soon determine which camp is the correct camp, and what law enforcement must prove before it can compel a person to unlock a device.

The appellate courts in North Dakota and Minnesota have not established residence in a respective camp.  Nevertheless, if you, or someone you know, is subject to a warrant requiring the unlocking of a device, it is important to fully understand what law enforcement can and cannot require.  If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact Vogel Law Firm at 701-237-6983, or send an email to [email protected].

Disclaimer: The materials available at this website are for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem.  Use of and access to this website or any of the links contained or produced within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between the Vogel Law Firm and the user or browser.  The opinions expressed at or through this site are the opinions of the individual author and may not reflect the opinions of the Vogel Law Firm or any individual attorney.  Under no circumstances shall the Vogel Law Firm have any liability to you for any loss or damage of any kind incurred as a result of the use of the information or your reliance on any information provided.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

Categories

  • Bankruptcy (3)
  • Business Law (4)
  • Child Custody (1)
  • COVID-19 (27)
  • Criminal Defense (8)
  • Debtor/Creditor (2)
  • Divorce (2)
  • DNR (1)
  • DUI (1)
  • Employer Rights (20)
  • Employment Law (24)
  • Estate Planning (5)
  • Family Law (3)
  • Firm News (31)
  • Immigration (1)
  • Injuries (1)
  • IRAs (1)
  • Life Insurance (1)
  • Paid Leave (2)
  • Personal Injury (5)
  • Premarital Agreements (1)
  • Prenuptial Agreements (1)
  • The North Dakota Employer's Blog (6)
  • Uncategorized (59)
  • Unemployment Insurance (1)
  • Wrongful Death (2)

Archives

  • January 2021 (5)
  • December 2020 (5)
  • October 2020 (1)
  • September 2020 (1)
  • August 2020 (2)
  • July 2020 (2)
  • June 2020 (4)
  • May 2020 (9)
  • April 2020 (12)
  • March 2020 (12)
  • February 2020 (11)
  • January 2020 (2)
  • November 2019 (2)
  • September 2019 (1)
  • August 2019 (3)
  • July 2019 (2)
  • June 2019 (3)
  • May 2019 (2)
  • March 2019 (1)
  • January 2019 (1)
  • December 2018 (1)
  • November 2018 (1)
  • October 2018 (2)
  • September 2018 (2)
  • August 2018 (3)
  • July 2018 (2)
  • June 2018 (4)
  • March 2018 (1)
  • January 2018 (3)
  • October 2017 (1)
  • September 2017 (1)
  • June 2017 (4)
  • March 2017 (1)
  • January 2017 (1)
  • December 2016 (2)
  • October 2016 (2)
  • September 2016 (1)
  • June 2016 (1)
  • May 2016 (5)
  • April 2016 (1)
  • March 2016 (1)
  • February 2016 (2)
  • January 2016 (3)
  • December 2015 (1)
  • November 2015 (1)
  • October 2015 (1)
  • September 2015 (2)
  • July 2015 (1)
  • June 2015 (2)
  • April 2015 (1)
  • January 2015 (1)
  • December 2014 (1)
  • October 2014 (1)
  • August 2014 (1)
  • June 2014 (1)
  • May 2014 (1)
  • October 2013 (1)
  • June 2013 (2)
  • May 2013 (2)
  • January 2013 (1)
  • December 2012 (1)
  • November 2012 (2)
  • October 2012 (1)
  • February 2012 (1)

Recent Posts

  • The North Dakota Employer’s Blog: Mask Mandate Update
  • The North Dakota Employer’s Blog: Independent Contractor or Employee?
  • The North Dakota Employer’s Blog – My Employee Stormed the Capitol: Can I fire him for that?
  • The North Dakota Employer’s Blog: What Now? Stepping Away from the Edge
  • The North Dakota Employer’s Blog: North Dakota Legislature Convenes
Bg SubscribeSubscribe To This Blog's FeedFindLaw Network

Quality Attorneys. Quality Care.

Ultimately, we measure our success in terms of how we improve the lives of our clients.
We never forget that the most important part in any legal matter is the people involved.

Experience The Vogel Law Firm Difference

Quality legal service starts with contacting Vogel Law Firm. Call 866-771-9930 or submit the form to request a consultation.

Email Us For A Response

Experience The Vogel Law Firm Difference

Quality legal service starts with contacting Vogel Law Firm. Call 866-771-9930 or submit the form to request a consultation.

ECN | Employers Counsel Network
Fellow Litigation Counsel of America
Super Lawyers
Super Lawyers
Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum
Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum
Listed In Best Lawyers | The World's Premier Guide
ALFA International | The Global Legal Network

Fargo Office

218 NP Avenue
Fargo, ND 58102

Phone: 866-771-9930

Fax: 701-356-6395

Fargo Law Office Map

Bismarck Office

200 North 3rd Street,
Suite 201
Bismarck, ND 58501

Phone: 701-214-4393

Fax: 701-258-9705

Bismarck Law Office Map

Moorhead Office

215 30th Street North
Moorhead, MN 56560

Phone: 218-979-4994

Fax: 218-236-9873

Moorhead Law Office Map

Minneapolis Office

7300 West 147th Street,
Suite 304
Apple Valley, MN 55124

Phone: 952-236-4947

Fax: 952-898-4070

Apple Valley Law Office Map

Grand Forks Office

2825 36th Avenue South,
Suite A
Grand Forks, ND 58201

Phone: 701-203-4156

Fax: 701-864-2748

Grand Forks Law Office Map
  • Follow
  • Follow
  • Follow
Review Us
Employee Email

© 2021 Vogel Law Firm. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer | Site Map | Privacy Policy | Business Development Solutions by FindLaw, part of Thomson Reuters