Code of Criminal Procedure · U.S. Supreme Court, 2014
Riley v. California
Riley v. California is a 2014 U.S. Supreme Court decision. This page summarizes key points and works through practice questions for Texas peace officer exam preparation.
Key points
- Cell phone seized incident to arrest
- Warrant generally required to search digital contents
- Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 18.0215
Learn more about this topic
Time yourself, score your run, review missed questions with statute references — Free Practice Pass cadets get limited access.
Worked examples
Worked example 1
Cell phone data on a phone seized incident to arrest:
- May be searched without a warrant under search-incident-to-arrest doctrine
- Generally requires a warrant — Riley v. California Correct
- May be searched by any officer present
- 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)