Code of Criminal Procedure · Riley v. California

Riley v. California

Riley v. California is covered under Riley v. California and tested on the TCOLE peace officer licensing exam. Cadets typically encounter this topic under "Search & Seizure" on practice exams.

To prove this offense, the State must establish each of the following elements: Cell phone seized incident to arrest; Warrant generally required to search digital contents; Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 18.0215.

Elements you must prove

  • Cell phone seized incident to arrest
  • Warrant generally required to search digital contents
  • Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 18.0215

Practice 1 question on this topic

Time yourself, score your run, review missed questions with statute references — Free Practice Pass cadets get limited access.

Start Free Practice

Worked examples

Worked example 1

Cell phone data on a phone seized incident to arrest:

  1. May be searched without a warrant under search-incident-to-arrest doctrine
  2. Generally requires a warrant — Riley v. California Correct
  3. May be searched by any officer present
  4. May be searched if turned off
Why: Riley held that police generally must secure a warrant before searching the digital contents of a cell phone seized incident to arrest. The Texas analog (CCP art. 18.0215) reinforces this.
Statute: Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373 (2014)