In R v Fearon, a majority of the Supreme Court of Canada decided that police can search the contents of your cellphone as long as the search is ‘truly incidental’ to a lawful arrest and is tailored to the reason for the arrest.
(Sean Kilpatrick/THE CANADIAN PRESS)
What exactly does “truly incidental” mean? Canadian law is plagued by this type of ambiguous language. I’m skeptical whether the Supreme Court Judges possess the technical vocabulary to understand the implications of their decision. What is the problem with requiring investigators to obtain a warrant?
From The Globe and Mail – “Last month, the Supreme Court of Canada decided that police do not need a warrant to search the contents of your cellphone. In R v Fearon, a majority of the court decided that police can search the contents of your cellphone as long as the search is “truly incidental” to a lawful arrest and is tailored to the reason for the arrest.”
Read the full article – The Globe and Mail – Phones are more private than houses – so they shouldn’t be easier to search
