Nearly everyone in the United States uses a cell phone on a daily basis, and these devices contain a great deal of personal information. This is especially true for young people, who are always finding new uses for technology. While most people have some expectations of privacy when using electronic devices, there are situations where a phone may be subject to a search by school officials or law enforcement. Students will want to understand their rights regarding cell phones, since information uncovered during a search could lead to serious penalties, up to and including criminal charges.

Use of Phone Decryption Technology by Schools

Students will often use their phones to send text messages and emails, take and share photos and videos, browse the internet, and communicate with others using social media. All of these activities can involve intimate details of a person’s life that they will want to keep private. If teachers or administrators suspect that a student has violated a school’s policies or committed unlawful acts, they may ask a student to unlock their phone and submit to a search. In some cases, schools may tell students that school policies require them to unlock their phones when requested, or they may impose penalties if students refuse to comply.

In a troubling trend, some schools have begun using technology to hack into students’ phones. Several school districts throughout the United States have purchased mobile device forensic tools that can be used to bypass passcodes and access information stored on cell phones. This technology is often used by the FBI and other law enforcement organizations to investigate terrorism or other serious crimes, and when it is used by school officials, it may result in improper access to a student’s private information.

While modern technology has improved people’s lives in many ways, it has also created concerns about privacy. Most people carry cell phones or other electronic devices with them everywhere they go, and the use of apps that track their location can leave a data trail that provides a great deal of information about their activities and behavior. In some cases, this data may be accessed by law enforcement officials who are looking to identify criminal suspects. Recently, the use of “geofence warrants” has come under scrutiny, and criminal defense attorneys and privacy advocates are fighting back against the improper collection of data during criminal investigations.

What Are Geofence Warrants?

“Geofencing” refers to drawing a boundary around a certain geographic area and identifying people within that area who have used electronic devices. When people use apps such as Google Maps, their location history is saved, and this data may be used to identify them at a later date. 

Over the past several years, law enforcement officials have begun issuing warrants to obtain location data for people who were in a certain area at the time that criminal activity allegedly occurred. Google has reported that warrants for this type of data increased by 1,500% between 2017 and 2018 and by another 500% between 2018 and 2019. As of the end of 2109, the company was receiving as many as 180 law-enforcement-related requests for information each week.

The coronavirus pandemic has caused people and families throughout the United States to fear for their safety. While steps can be taken to minimize the risks of infection, these measures have led to a variety of other concerns, including increases in the number of reports of domestic violence. 

The difficulties that families are currently experiencing has led to increased stress in many households, as well as concerns about mental health and substance abuse. Couples who have struggled with relationship issues may have seen these problems become even worse due to being required to remain in close quarters together. Stress about financial problems caused by the loss of a job or difficulties addressing children’s educational needs while they are learning from home may also contribute to the breakdown of relationships between family members. 

These concerns may cause a tense situation to boil over, potentially leading to accusations of domestic assault or abuse. Advocates have reported that in recent months, calls reporting domestic violence have increased by 70%, and shelters for victims are currently at 150% capacity. This trend is expected to increase over the holiday season and during the new year. Those who are facing allegations of domestic violence will want to work with a criminal defense attorney to determine how they can address criminal charges, defend against a conviction, and preserve their family relationships and reputation.

The coronavirus pandemic has affected the legal system in many ways, and some defendants have been left in limbo as they await a trial. To protect public safety, the courts in Connecticut have significantly reduced their capacity, and no criminal jury trials have been held in the state since March of 2020. While courts have taken protective measures and planned to begin holding trials, continued concerns about COVID-19 infections have delayed proceedings, and multiple cases involving court employees who have been infected have led some to call for the closure of courts for the time being. Because of this, many criminal defense attorneys are concerned about how this ongoing situation will affect the rights of defendants.

Delays in Trials Due to Difficulty Finding Jurors

The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees that those in the United States who are facing criminal charges have the right to a speedy, public trial before an impartial jury. Postponing criminal trials indefinitely would violate the rights of defendants, so courts have been working to determine how to resume these trials while still protecting the safety of everyone involved, including defendants, judges, attorneys, jurors, witnesses, and others who would be present in court.

Courts have taken steps to protect the safety of those who would be present during trials. These include requiring masks for everyone involved in a trial and following social distancing guidelines, as well as installing equipment to circulate clean air into courtrooms. However, the primary issue that is delaying trials is the difficulty of finding people who are willing to serve as jurors. Many people who have been contacted for jury service have not responded to summons, or they have asked to be excused because of concerns that they or their family members could be at risk of COVID-19 infections.

The issue of police brutality and other forms of misconduct by police officers has been at the forefront of public debate over the past decade. These concerns have become even more prevalent in 2020 due to multiple incidents in which criminal suspects were killed by the police, sparking nationwide protests. Along with raising concerns about racial discrimination and the use of excessive force, advocates for criminal justice reform have noted that in many cases, incidents involving harm to suspects occur because police officers are ill-equipped to address emergency calls involving people who suffer from mental illnesses.

High Fatality Rates in Police Calls Involving Mental Illness

A number of recent studies have looked at cases in which police officers throughout the United States responded to situations involving mental health concerns, and they found some troubling results. Around one fourth of the cases in which a person was killed in an encounter with police officers occurred in situations where officers were responding to reports of “disruptive behavior” related to mental illness or substance abuse. In addition, people with untreated mental health issues are 16 times more likely to be killed by police than other civilians, and police shootings that result in the death of a person with mental illness are 39% more likely to occur in small or mid-sized towns rather than large cities.

Police officers are trained to respond to potential threats, and they are authorized to use deadly force when they fear for their lives. Because of this, they may not be properly equipped to deal with those who are suffering from mental illness. If a person behaves erratically or unexpectedly, police officers are more likely to respond with force rather than attempting to deescalate the situation.