Now, support of the judge’s action recently by the New Mexico Court of
Appeals potentially raises a question for every officer in the country:
to what extent are records from your personal cell phone subject to
public review in a criminal trial if you carry the phone with you on
duty?
After weeks of wrangling, Judge Stephen Pfeffer in the end agreed
that the defense “had a right to access the requested information even
without knowing whether any such information existed.” He did attach
limitations. Only Boerth’s cell phone records during the controversial
six-minute “missing footage” gap in his dash-cam recording would be
subject to review. This apparently was the time the defense considered
most likely that the alleged C.I. call occurred. And the State could
request that the judge first inspect the records alone in his chambers
to determine if they included “personal matters irrelevant to the
case.”
With those conditions, he ordered Bevacqua-Young to
produce Boerth’s cell phone records. The officer was “an arm of the
State,” the court ruled, and therefore his private phone records were
“within the possession, custody, or control of the State, making them
subject to disclosure.” Still, the prosecutor steadfastly refused to
order Boerth to surrender them. Read more
Location Oakland, Ca - Private Investigator
California Closing Criminal Records
-
SB-731 Automatically Sealing of Conviction and Arrest Records A social
justice bill that implements a system to prospectively and retroactively
seal conv...