The original post: /r/privacy by /u/MyDogNewt on 2024-11-09 17:32:36.

I’m a 3L in law school in Oklahoma and the firm I work at had an interesting case come up the other day. Our client was arrested and his cell phone was seized. While in custody, LE came to him with a search warrant signed by a judge for his phone and an order that the defendant disclose his seized phone’s passcode. The defendant was told that refusal to disclose the passcode would result in contempt charges and subsequent punishment. The defendant then reluctantly recited his passcode for LE.

I’ve yet to get the search warrant return to see exactly how the state argued this point and got the judge to agree.

However my research has shown this has happened before, in Oklahoma and New Jersey, and been upheld on appeal.

Appears prosecutors and judges are utilizing the Foregone Conclusion doctrine as an exception to the protections of both the 4th and 5th Amendments to the US Constitution.

This is a road I hate to see our courts going down as the implications to personal privacy are extremely detrimental. You could apply this to cell phone passcodes, electronic storage device passcodes, safe combinations and more.