Ill. AG Urges SCOTUS to Deny Cert to Defendant Who Refuses to Unlock His Phone
The U.S. Supreme Court should deny criminal defendant Keiron Sneed's cert petition to reverse the finding of the Illinois Supreme Court that Illinois can compel him under the Fifth Amendment to produce his cellphone’s passcode for a police investigation, said…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
the state's opposition brief Monday (docket 23-5827). Sneed was arrested on charges of forging two paychecks and depositing them in his bank account using his cellphone (see 2311200026). The police obtained a warrant to seize the cellphone but were unable to execute it because the phone was password-protected and Sneed refused to unlock it. SCOTUS lacks jurisdiction to hear Sneed’s case because the Illinois Supreme Court decision compelling him to unlock his cellphone was an interlocutory opinion from a state court, said the opposition brief. Even if SCOTUS had jurisdiction, its review wouldn’t be warranted, it said. There’s no “division of authority” as to whether the Fifth Amendment’s “foregone conclusion doctrine” is applicable to the compelled entry of passcodes, it said. Any disagreement as to what facts must be foregone conclusions in that context “is nascent and undeveloped,” it said. The Illinois Supreme Court “correctly applied” SCOTUS Fifth Amendment precedents in this case, it said.