United States v. Castillo
70 F.4th 894
5th Cir.2023Background
- Castillo and two companions entered the U.S. at Presidio, Texas in an RV late at night and were sent to secondary inspection.
- Officers discovered a .357 revolver concealed between frying pans, ammunition in a taped pressure cooker, and marijuana in luggage.
- Castillo was detained, admitted ownership of contraband, and provided his phone passcode to an HSI agent.
- An agent performed a manual (on-screen) search of Castillo’s phone and found suspected child pornography; agents then performed more intrusive forensic searches of that and other devices, recovering additional images.
- Castillo was indicted on six child-pornography counts; the district court denied his suppression motion, he was convicted and sentenced, and he appealed.
- The Fifth Circuit reviewed whether the manual phone search at the border required individualized suspicion and affirmed, adopting the consensus of sister circuits that manual border phone searches need no individualized suspicion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a routine/manual on-screen search of a cell phone at the border requires individualized suspicion | The U.S. argued the border-search exception permits routine/manual searches of electronic devices without individualized suspicion | Castillo argued the manual and subsequent forensic searches violated the Fourth Amendment | Held: No individualized suspicion required for routine/manual border cell-phone searches; manual search here was lawful and affirmation follows |
| Whether a forensic (more intrusive) search of a cell phone at the border requires reasonable suspicion | The U.S. pointed to circuits that allow forensic searches without suspicion | Castillo argued forensic searches require reasonable suspicion | Held: Court did not decide the forensic standard; noted circuit split and resolved the case on the validity of the manual search |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Ramsey, 431 U.S. 606 (establishes longstanding border-search exception)
- Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373 (cell phones are qualitatively different and highly privacy-intrusive)
- United States v. Flores-Montano, 541 U.S. 149 (suspicionless vehicle-component searches at the border permissible)
- Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (scope of searches must be commensurate with their purposes)
- Alasaad v. Mayorkas, 988 F.3d 8 (basic/manual border searches of devices are routine and need no reasonable suspicion)
- United States v. Cano, 934 F.3d 1002 (manual border phone searches are routine; many circuits require reasonable suspicion for forensic exams)
- United States v. Touset, 890 F.3d 1227 (Eleventh Circuit view that forensic device searches at the border require no suspicion)
- United States v. Aguilar, 973 F.3d 445 (routine border inspections need no particularized suspicion)
- United States v. Molina-Isidoro, 884 F.3d 287 (nonroutine border searches require reasonable suspicion)