Category Archives: Fifth Amendment

A Virginia Circuit Court judge ruled on Thursday that a persondoes not need to provide a passcode to unlock their phone for the police. The court also ruled that demanding a suspect to provide a fingerprint to unlock aphone would be constitutional.

The case in question this week involved a man named David Baust, who was charged in February with trying to strangle his girlfriend. The Virginian Pilot reports that Baust's phone might contain video of the conflict but that hisphone was locked with a passcode. Baust's attorney argued that passcodes are protected by the Fifth Amendment.

The judge agreed with Baust, though he noted in his written opinion that giving police a fingerprint is akin to providing a DNA or handwriting sample or an actual key, which the law permits, the Virginian Pilot reports. A passcode, though, requires the defendant to divulge knowledge, which the law protects against.

The ruling is interesting because it draws into relief the legal difference between a person's identity and their knowledge. The Fifth Amendment protects peoplefrom being forced to witness against themselves, and last year when Apple's TouchID fingerprint sensor was announced, Ars' sister site Wired noted that fingerprints may not have the same protection as passcodes. A communication is 'testimonial' only when it reveals the contents of your mind, Wired wrote. We cant invoke the privilege against self-incrimination to prevent the government from collecting biometrics like fingerprints, DNA samples, or voice exemplars. Why? Because the courts have decided that this evidence doesnt reveal anything you know. Its not testimonial.

Ars has contacted Baust's attorney and will update if we hear any comment from him.

Follow this link:
Virginia judge: Police can demand a suspect unlock a phone with a fingerprint

Advances in technology always make for interesting interpretations of established law.

Most recently, a Virginia Beach Circuit Court this week ruled that an individual in a criminal proceeding cannot be forced to divulge the passcode to his cellphone as it would violate the self-incrimination clause of the Fifth Amendment. At the same time, the Court held that an individual can be compelled to give up his fingerprint to unlock Touch ID, or any fingerprint protected device for that matter.

The Court reasoned that while a passcode requires a defendant to divulge actual knowledge, a fingerprint is a form of physical evidence, akin to a handwriting sample or DNA that authorities are already legally allowed to demand in certain circumstances. In a similar vein, the Supreme Court has previously ruled that while authorities can compel an individual to hand over a physical key to a locked safe, they can't compel an individual to provide them with a combination to said safe; the key in this example is nothing more than physical evidence while the combination, based on an individual's unique knowledge, is categorized as "testimonial."

Mashable adds:

"It's exactly what we thought it would happen when Apple announced its fingerprint ID," Hanni Fakhoury, a staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights organization, told Mashable. (Android phones such as the Galaxy S5 and HTC One Max also have fingerprint ID systems.)

While the ruling in Virginia Beach is not as binding as a Supreme Court decision, it does establish legal precedent other local courts can draw on. More importantly, "it's just a good wake-up call for people to realize that fingerprint ID doesn't necessarily provide the same sort of legal protection than a password does," Fakhoury says.

As relayed by The Virginian-Pilot, the ruling stems from a case involving a man charged with strangling his girlfriend. Authorities had reason to believe that video footage of the couple's altercation might be located on the defendant's cellphone and "wanted a judge to force" the defendant hand over the passcode.

Read the original here:
Court rules: Touch ID is not protected by the Fifth Amendment but Passcodes are

Disciplinary hearing for SB officer moved to later date
A South Bend Police officer is fighting for his job. Jack Stilp was questioned before the Board of Public Safety today, but he cited the Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself.

By: WSBT-TV

More here:
Disciplinary hearing for SB officer moved to later date - Video

CHATTANOOGA, TN (WRCB) - The Chattanooga police officer at the center of a TBI criminal investigation appeared in court Friday.

Detective Karl Fields was in court, testifying as the lead investigator in Cordalro Strickland's murder case. But most of the questions revolved around the criminal investigation into the detective, prompting Fields to plead the Fifth Amendment over 15 times.

Fields was put on administrative leave last month, following allegations of inappropriate contact with a woman who filed a rape report.

There were questions whether or not the detective could testify in the upcoming murder trial while he was under a criminal probe himself. On Friday, attorneys argued whether or not a jury could hear the most recent allegations against the police officer.

"I'm currently on administrative leave," Fields said.

"Why are you on administrative leave?" asked Strickland's attorney, Brandy Spurgin.

"Undergoing investigation by internal affairs and TBI," Fields replied.

The legal fallout is crossing over into some of the cases Fields worked, namely Strickland's, who is charged with first degree murder in the 2011 shooting death of Melvin Fennell.

Fields answered questions about the case, but he was also grilled about his inappropriate contact with the alleged rape victim.

"Did you joke with another officer that videos in that case were YouTube material?" Spurgin asked.

Continue reading here:
Detective dodges questions about allegations made during rape investigation

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. (WOFL FOX 35 ORLANDO) -

Both former Governor Charlie Crist and current Governor Rick Scott turned up the heat in their final debate before the election, with both men making it clear they do not like each other and both men taking multiple opportunities to attack their opponent over personal wealth and other issues. One repeatedly called the other by first name before taking their jabs.

On personal character and ethics

Crist employed the same type of attacks he has used on television about Scott, pointing to his tenure at HCA/Columbia, a hospital chain which was fined $1.7 billion for Medicare fraud. Crist repeated a line from one of those ads, saying that Scott once invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination while questioned about an unrelated civil lawsuit.

Rick you talk about being accountable. How were you accountable with HCA at all? asked Crist.

Scott raised questions about associates of Crist, including Scott Rothstein, who was convicted and imprisoned for masterminding one of the state's largest Ponzi schemes, and Jim Greer, the disgraced former chairman of the Republican Party of Florida, who served time after pleading guilty to theft and money laundering.

"Scott Rothstein testified, under oath, that Charlie was paid to appoint judges," said Scott. "His hand-picked party chairmen went to prison."

On raising the minimum wage and job creation

One issue the pair returned to was the minimum wage. Scott and Crist were on opposite sides of this issue like many others.

The private sector determines wages," said Scott. "Let's look at actually what happened. When Charlie says he wants to raise the minimum wage, that, according to the Congressional Budget Office, would lose $500,000 jobs. Charlie, you lost 832,000 jobs when you were governor. How many more jobs can we lose?

Continue reading here:
Scott and Crist have heated and personal final debate before November election

PITTSBURGH -- An evidence suppression hearing for Pennsylvania Cyber Charter School founder Nick Trombetta will stretch into November after another day of arguments Monday was more notable for who did not testify than for who did.

Beaver County solicitor Joe Askar, who also represents the Rochester-based National Network of Digital Schools, invoked his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination and refused to testify. Askar was subpoenaed by Trombettas defense team in their effort to get recorded conversations with attorneys, including him, tossed out by U.S. District Court Chief Judge Joy Flowers Conti.

Trombetta -- who faces 11 federal charges -- is claiming that the FBI violated his attorney-client privilege by recording discussions with Askar, former PA Cyber attorney Timothy Barry, and Ralph Monico and Leo Daly, attorneys who also represented NNDS. A Sept. 30 hearing was continued until Monday.

Mr. Askar has neither committed nor been charged with any crime. Nor will he be. As the U.S. Supreme Court has said, the privilege is available not only to protect the guilty, but also the innocent: We have emphasized that one of the Fifth Amendments basic functions is to protect innocent men, who otherwise might be ensnared by ambiguous circumstances, Bruce Teitelbaum, Askars attorney, said in a statement.

The ambiguities inherent in this complex matter and the possibility of misunderstanding compelled me, out of caution, to advise Mr. Askar to invoke his privilege, Teitelbaum said.

Barry was called to the stand by defense attorney Adam Hoffinger later in the day, but was excused after a lengthy off-the-record sidebar involving his attorney, Trombettas lawyers and prosecutors. Hoffinger said Barry would be recalled when the hearing continues next month.

Trombetta attorney Robert Salerno quizzed FBI agent Samantha Bell, the lead investigator, on synopses of calls monitored by agents, instructions to agents on recording calls and minimization, the FBIs name for when agents stop listening to calls that are irrelevant or might be protected by attorney-client privilege.

After Barry was excused, FBI agent Paul Allen took the stand and was questioned by Hoffinger on a June 2012 synopsis of a recorded call on which he noted that Trombetta would be talking to his attorney.

Hoffinger wondered how agents could know when to stop recording privileged communications if they truly did not know whether Trombetta had a personal attorney. Allen said he did not exactly remember, but testified that he might have simply written the note to be cautious.

Im not sure why I used the personal pronoun his, Allen said. I didnt mean anything by it.

See the original post:
Agents questioned, Askar takes the Fifth in Trombetta hearing

Property Rights | Century Law Group
http://fighteminentdomain.com/ | Century Law Group | Eminent domain is provided for in the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution as a section of property rights. This allows a government...

By: Century Law

See the article here:
Property Rights | Century Law Group - Video

All About - Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
What is Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution? A report all about Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution for homework/assignment The F...

By: All About

See more here:
All About - Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Video

By Elisabeth Hulette The Virginian-Pilot October 12, 2014

VIRGINIA BEACH

Picture this: You're being prosecuted for a crime.

Police have a search warrant for your iPhone, but they can't open it without your pass code. Now they're asking a judge to order you to give it up. What do you do?

If you're David Baust, you put up a fight. The Emergency Medical Services captain, who is charged with trying to strangle his girlfriend during a fight in February, argues the move raises a Fifth Amendment issue - that by opening his phone, he could incriminate himself.

A judge will decide Baust's case, but it's unlikely to settle the issue for good. Apple and Android recently announced plans to dramatically increase the amount of information on their phones that's automatically encrypted - translated into code - making it far more difficult for law enforcement officials to get the access they say they need to convict criminals.

As that happens, attorneys and experts say, the courts are likely to see more cases pitting prosecutors and police against pass codes.

"It's a bitterly disputed debate on all fronts," said Sharon Nelson, immediate past president of the Virginia State Bar and the president of Sensei Enterprises, a digital forensics company in northern Virginia.

"You can see the need of law enforcement on the one hand," she said. "On the other, the Fourth Amendment means nothing if you have to turn your life over to the government." The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches.

Police access to cellphones changed radically after a June ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court. Officers still can extract information from cellphones of people who are arrested but now need a court-issued search warrant.

Read more:
Code cases: Police want phone access, but some pass

Fresno Police Officer violated fifth amendment at a dui checkpoint.
On Wednesday, October 8, 2014 3:47 PM, I went through a checkpoint that i did not know until i enter through the orange cones and see a sign that there was a sobriety checkpoint sign. At that...

By: max xiong

More:
Fresno Police Officer violated fifth amendment at a dui checkpoint. - Video