State of Arizona v. Bryan Mitchell Lietzau, 463 P.3d 200

Bryan Lietzau was placed on 18 months supervised probation for aggravated harassment and agreed to standard probation conditions including Condition 4: to "submit to search and seizure of person and property by the APD without a search warrant."
The victim’s mother (G.E.) reported a suspected "inappropriate" sexual relationship between Lietzau (22) and S.E. (13).
Surveillance officer Casey Camacho arrested Lietzau for unrelated probation violations (failure to provide access, counseling, drug testing, community restitution). En route to jail, Camacho looked through Lietzau’s cell phone texts and found incriminating messages/photos. Police then obtained a warrant to search the phone and charged Lietzau with sexual conduct with a minor.
Lietzau moved to suppress evidence from the warrantless phone search; the superior court granted suppression, finding the search unreasonable and Condition 4 didn’t reach cell phones.
The court of appeals reversed, holding Condition 4 included cell phones and the search was reasonable under the Adair factors. The Arizona Supreme Court granted review.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Lietzau)	Held
Whether the probation term authorizing warrantless searches of "property" encompasses cell phones	Condition 4’s plain term "property" includes a cell phone; probationers have diminished privacy	Riley requires warrants for cell phones; the probation condition cannot lawfully authorize warrantless phone searches	The term "property" includes cell phones; Riley does not bar warrantless probationary phone searches when reasonable
Whether Camacho’s warrantless search of the phone violated the Fourth Amendment (reasonableness under Adair)	Search was reasonable under the totality (valid probation condition, reports of a sexual relationship with a minor, multiple probation violations; search limited to texts)	Search was suspicionless, arbitrary, unrelated to arrest or proper purpose; trial court’s suppression was correct	Search was reasonable under Adair: Lietzau’s expectation of privacy was diminished, the search had an objective, probation-related purpose, was not arbitrary, and stayed within scope

Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373 (recognizing heightened privacy in cell phones; warrants generally required for arrestee phone searches)
United States v. Knights, 534 U.S. 112 (probation conditions can diminish expectation of privacy and permit warrantless searches)
Griffin v. Wisconsin, 483 U.S. 868 (probation supervision permits intrusions to protect public and facilitate rehabilitation)
State v. Adair, 241 Ariz. 58 (probationary search reasonableness assessed under totality of circumstances and enumerated factors)
United States v. Lara, 815 F.3d 605 (Ninth Circuit treated whether "property" unambiguously includes phone data and suppressed an unreasonable phone search)
Samson v. California, 547 U.S. 843 (probationers’ reduced privacy supports intensive supervision and searches)
State v. Montgomery, 115 Ariz. 583 (Arizona precedent recognizing that probationers may have reduced Fourth Amendment protections)