Skip to content

Riley v. California

Docket No. Op. Below Argument Opinion Vote Author Term
13-132 Cal. Apr 29, 2014 Jun 25, 2014 9-0 Roberts OT 2013

Holding: The police generally may not, without a warrant, search digital information on a cellphone seized from an individual who has been arrested.

Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 9-0, in an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts on June 25, 2014. Justice Alito filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.

DateProceedings and Orders (key to color coding)
07/30/2013Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 30, 2013)
08/12/2013Waiver of right of respondent California to respond filed.
08/15/2013Consent to the filing of amicus curae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.
08/21/2013DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 30, 2013.
08/30/2013Brief amici curiae of Center for Democracy & Technology and Electronic Frontier Foundation filed. (Distributed)
08/30/2013Brief amicus curiae of Constitutional Accountability Center filed.
08/30/2013Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed.
09/03/2013Response Requested . (Due October 3, 2013)
09/27/2013Brief of respondent California in opposition filed.
10/16/2013Reply of petitioner David Leon Riley filed.
11/20/2013DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 6, 2013.
12/03/2013Record Requested .
12/23/2013Record received. California Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District and San Diego Superior Court (1 box)
12/31/2013DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 17, 2014.
01/17/2014Petition GRANTED limited to the following question: Whether evidence admitted at petitioner's trial was obtained in a search of petitioner's cell phone that violated petitioner's Fourth Amendment rights.
02/11/2014SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Tuesday, April 29, 2014
02/18/2014Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.
02/19/2014Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, rece8ved from counsel for the respondent.
03/03/2014Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed.)
03/03/2014Brief of petitioner David Leon Riley filed.
03/07/2014Brief amici curiae of Criminal Law Professors in support of private parties filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
03/07/2014Brief amici curiae of American Civil Liberties Union, et al. filed. (Distributed)
03/10/2014CIRCULATED.
03/10/2014Brief amici curiae of American Library Assciation, and The Internet Archive in support of Riley and Wurie filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
03/10/2014Brief amicus curiae of Constitutional Accountability Center in support of Riley and Wurie filed. VIDED.
03/10/2014Brief amici curiae of Center for Democracy & Technology, and Electronic Frontier Foundation in support of Riley and Wurie filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
03/10/2014Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, et al. filed. (Distributed)
03/10/2014Brief amicus curiae of DKT Liberty Project filed. (Distributed)
03/10/2014Brief amici curiae of Electronic Privacy Information Center, et al. filed. (Distributed)
03/10/2014Brief amici curiae of National Press Photographers Association, et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
03/10/2014Brief amici curiae of Professors Charles E. MacLean & Adam Lamparello filed. (Distributed)
03/10/2014Brief amicus curiae of The Cato Institute filed. (Distributed)
04/02/2014Brief of respondent California filed. (Distributed)
04/09/2014Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. (Distributed)
04/09/2014Brief amici curiae of Association of State Criminal Investigative Agencies, et al. filed. (Distributed)
04/09/2014Brief amici curiae of Arizona, et al. filed. (Reprinted) (Distributed)
04/10/2014Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.
04/18/2014Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.
04/22/2014Reply of petitioner David Leon Riley filed. (Distributed)
04/29/2014Argued. For petitioner: Jeffrey L. Fisher, Stanford, Cal. For respondent: Edward C. DuMont, Solicitor General, San Francisco, Cal.; and Michael R. Dreeben, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.)
06/25/2014Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Roberts, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Alito, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. VIDED with No. 13-212.
07/28/2014MANDATE ISSUED.
07/28/2014Record returned for Court of Appeal of California, Fourth Appellate District, Division One.