* 
While one might think that this would not be an issue in the wake of the United States Supreme Court ruling that police must obtain a warrant in order to search a cell phone, a protection extended by the Fourth Amendment, this ruling in a lower circuit court in Virginia says that a fingerprint of a suspect is not protected by the Fifth Amendment, which states in part that a person will not “be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.”
In a ruling passed down by Judge Steven Fucci, a criminal cannot be compelled to disclose any information, such as provide a pass-code ... *
from PhoneArena http://ift.tt/1wU2xN0
via http://ift.tt/1wU2xN0
While one might think that this would not be an issue in the wake of the United States Supreme Court ruling that police must obtain a warrant in order to search a cell phone, a protection extended by the Fourth Amendment, this ruling in a lower circuit court in Virginia says that a fingerprint of a suspect is not protected by the Fifth Amendment, which states in part that a person will not “be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.”In a ruling passed down by Judge Steven Fucci, a criminal cannot be compelled to disclose any information, such as provide a pass-code ... *
from PhoneArena http://ift.tt/1wU2xN0
via http://ift.tt/1wU2xN0
Blogger Comment