WELCOME

"In this case, the defendant used a Fifth Amendment privilege

Jan. 25, 2017 by Kenneth Newton

"In this case, the defendant used a Fifth Amendment privilege to avoid having to ask a police officer or other government officer for a passcode when the officer or police officer did not provide the passcode, and the defendant is entitled under Florida's Fourth Amendment protection to a passcode that he or she did not obtain," the 5th Circuit ruling stated.

The 5th Circuit did not agree.

"The defendant is entitled under Florida's Fourth Amendment protection to a passcode that he or she did not obtain and it is clear that they have not satisfied this requirement," the 5th Circuit decision stated.

The Florida Supreme Court also disagreed with the 5th Circuit, and ruled that the police should not be forced to provide ID cards, as their search of the defendant's car was an "accident," and, thus, a Fifth Amendment privilege.

"The Fourth Amendment protects those persons, who are deprived of the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, who are not subjected to invasion of privacy or interference with the exercise of their constitutional rights," the 5th Circuit ruling stated.

"As to the Fourth Amendment privilege to obtain a passcode, the Fifth Circuit has shown clearly that the Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures and that the Fifth Amendment does not protect against an order to provide a passcode for an unauthorized person," Judge William G. Gentry wrote.

Florida has been a major beneficiary of the Fifth Amendment privilege since 1988. Florida now holds that, while not directly related to the Fifth Amendment, it does protect its citizens against unreasonable and excessive searches and seizures.

In Stahl, the 5th Circuit ruled that, although the suspect did not request a passcode to unlock the laptop, the laptop would have been unlocked by the police if he had been under the influence of drugs.

"The government does not claim that the police need a passcode to access a laptop, though, and neither does the government claim this privilege does not exist, nor does the government claim the ability to obtain a passcode when it has been obtained without a passcode," the 5th Circuit ruling stated.

However, the 4th Circuit did not agree with the 4th Circuit, and ruled that the use of "injurious force" or "insubordination" would not be constitutional, while "the Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures based on reasonable suspicion based upon probable cause," the 5th Circuit ruling stated.

"As noted, the Fourth and Fifth Amendments do