STATE v. THOMAS
2014 OK CR 12
| Okla. Crim. App. | 2014Background
- Thomas was charged with possession of marijuana (Count I) and possession of a firearm after former felony conviction (Count II) in Oklahoma County CF-2012-5639.
- Thomas moved to suppress evidence from his cell phone; a suppression hearing occurred on July 22, 2013, with partial grant of suppression (cell phone data).
- The State appealed the suppression ruling under 22 O.S.2011, § 1053(5).
- The trial court found the cell-phone search violated the Fourth Amendment and Riley v. California (2014) controls, requiring a warrant for data on a cell phone absent exigent circumstances.
- The Court affirmed suppression of the cell-phone data, holding the initial warrantless search unlawful and the good-faith exception inapplicable.
- The dispositive issue focused on whether the cell-phone data could be searched incident to arrest after Riley clarified warrants are required for cell-phone data.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the initial cell-phone search violated Fourth Amendment protections | State argued search incident to arrest was lawful | Thomas argued search violated privacy and Riley controls | Yes; unlawful search, warrant required |
| Whether the good-faith exception applies to the warrant | State contends good faith based on relying on warrant | Thomas contends no basis due to illegality of initial search | No; good-faith exception does not apply |
| Whether Gant/Riley language permits a phone search incident to arrest | State relies on vehicle-context rationale | Thomas argues cell-phone data cannot be treated like physical containers | Riley controls; warrant required for data |
| Whether the evidence could be saved by other grounds for admissibility | Search could be supported by probable cause for warrant | Probable cause for phone contents not established by unconsented search | No; exclusionary rule remains applicable |
Key Cases Cited
- Riley v. California, 134 S. Ct. 2473 (US 2014) (warrant required to search data on a cell phone absent exigent circumstances)
- State v. Bass, 300 P.3d 1193 (Ok Cr 2013) (good-faith exception not applicable when initial search unlawful)
- Sittingdown v. State, 240 P.3d 714 (Ok Cr 2010) (adopts good-faith exception standard in Oklahoma)
- Davis v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2419 (US 2011) (good-faith exception scope; reliance on precedent)
- Arizona v. Evans, 115 S. Ct. 1185 (US 1995) (extending good-faith exception)
- Riley v. California, 134 S. Ct. 2473 (US 2014) (reiterated requirement of warrants for cell-phone data)