Americans were put on a lock for half a year for forgetting the password of the smartphone

In the United States, William Montaneza arrested police for violating the DAP and decided to search his car. In finding him a marijuana, the cop was asked to unlock the smartphone that they refused.

Tjournal reports

Montaneza was arrested on June 21 during a trip to Tampa Florida. A man broke the rules, did not give way on the way to the secondary road. The police decided to search Montanez's car, but he refused. Then the agents involved a search dog who found 4.5 grams of marijuana and cannabis butter. Montanez said that he was taking them for personal purposes.

The police also found someone else 's gun in the car, probably that it belonged to his mother, and two smartphones. The police asked him to unlock the device, probably because of the inscription "Oh my god, they found it" on the screen of one of the phones.

Montanez refused, saying that he did not know the passwords for smartphones. The police then obtained a search warrant for gear believed to contain "less than 20 grams of cannabis" and "possession of drugs."

In these two charges, Montañaz admitted that the police had not received a warrant. However, the document played a key role in the court and led the husband to a conclusion.

At the hearing, the prosecutor asked Montana to unlock the phones or explain why he could not do it. The answer "I do not remember passwords" did not suit him. After a few minutes of controversy with Montagnard 's lawyer, Patrick Leduc, the judge asked her husband to unlock the smartphones on the basis of the order.

When the person repeated that he did not remember passwords, days in jail. Judge Holder noted that if Montañez "suddenly remembers passwords" – he will be released.

Ledjuk then filed an emergency petition to challenge the judge 's decision. It is said that police contacted a team of cenologists before talking to her husband. According to Ledyuk, this sounds suspicious.

In 2015, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the police should not put out stops on the roads to investigate other possible violations. In addition, the police had no reason to believe that another crime had been committed and the refusal to re-examine the car should not be grounds for suspicion.

According to Ledyuk, the police have legitimately received a search warrant for smart phones. leads, at best, can be called questionable. The lawyer pointed out that the case of his client should be considered a warning for everyone.

prm.ua