A federal court ruled that police can compel parolees to unlock their phones by physically using their thumbprints. On April 17, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the conviction of Jeremy Travis Payne, who was stopped for a traffic violation in 2021 that led to charges of drug possession and distribution.
Payne, on parole for assaulting an officer, had his phone unlocked by officers using his thumbprint during the stop without a warrant, as allowed by his parole conditions. The search revealed videos that led to additional charges.
One video, filmed hours before the stop, showed a room with cash, suspected fentanyl pills and a money-counting machine. Another showed a house and a BMW.
Officers traced a home address from Payne’s phone. The Coachella Valley Violent Crime Gang Task Force entered the residence using his keys and seized over 800 pills.
Payne was indicted for possession with intent to distribute fentanyl and cocaine.His lawyers contended that requiring him to unlock his phone constituted a “compelled testimonial communication,” breaching his Fourth Amendment protection from unreasonable searches and seizures, as well as his Fifth Amendment safeguard against self-incrimination.
However, the court noted Payne’s parole conditions allowed warrantless searches and reduced his expectations of privacy.
Court documents indicate that when a search warrant application contains illegally obtained information, a reviewing court must decide if the warrant still has probable cause after removing the inadmissible facts.
Citing United States v. Bishop , the district court found that excluding the facts discovered during an illegal sweep, the warrant still had probable cause. Payne acknowledged in his reply brief that the remaining information from his phone would likely have sufficed to establish probable cause, even without the facts obtained during the illegal sweep.