The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled today that forcing a suspect to unlock a smartphone does not violate the rights of the fifth amendment, adding to the ongoing debate over whether an arrested person can be forced to unlock a device with biometric technology or a password. Courts across the United States have been divided on the issue, with some holding that suspects cannot be forced to unlock iPhones, while others say it does not infringe rights.Most of these debates focus on the unlocking methods of biometric smartphones such as touch ID and face ID, but New Jersey goes one step further, allowing criminal defendants to provide passwords.
And in a case in New Jersey, prosecutors want to get two copies owned by former Essex County Sheriff Robert Andrews (Robert Andrews).(AgenciesiPhoneHe was accused of working in secret with a street gang. Andrews argued that requiring him to provide a password would violate his right to the Fifth Amendment and would not allow him to testify against himself, but the court dismissed the argument and said that only when the defendant
The Fifth Amendment right does not protect the suspect from presenting documents as evidence of the case. The court held that the SMS and phone contents of the iPhone were documents.
The court disagreed in its decision on a ratio of 4 to 3, saying that even if the password was considered a testimony, there was already evidence of text messages and telephone exchanges between the sheriff and suspected drug traffickers, which was part of the Fifth AmendmentPDF]In order to obtain.
Charles Sacramento, Andrews' lawyer, said the court's decision was
The ruling of the New Jersey Supreme Court may have an impact on future court cases involving lock-in of smartphones. The court will continue to reach different conclusions on the issue of smart phone unlocking until the U.S. Supreme Court intervenes and clarifies how constitutional rights and precedents apply to new technologies.