SALT LAKE CITY (ABC4) — The Utah Supreme Court made a massive ruling for digital privacy on Thursday, Dec. 14, finding that people cannot be compelled to verbally confirm with law enforcement the passcode to their cell phones.

The ruling comes from the ongoing case between the Utah State and Alfonso Valdez. According to court documents, Valdez was accused of kidnapping and assaulting his ex-girlfriend. Police had seized his phone as part of its investigation and obtained a search warrant for its contents. When police were unable to access the phone because of the passcode, detectives asked Valdez to give them the code. Valdez refused and police were unable to access the phone.

‘Meant to disrupt’: School bomb threat spreading throughout Utah deemed hoax

During Valdez’s trial, State prosecutors brought up Valdez’s refusal to provide his passcode when asked before a jury. The State argued that Valdez’s refusal and resulting lack of cell phone evidence undermined one of his defenses. The jury ultimately convicted Valdez, which Utah’s Court of Appeals later overturned.

The appeals court ruled that Valdez had a right under the Fifth Amendment to not provide his passcode. The Fifth Amendment provides those accused the privilege against self-incrimination and applies where communication is compelled, testimonial, and incriminating, according to Utah’s Supreme Court.

Close

Thanks for signing up!

Watch for us in your inbox.

Subscribe Now

ABC4 Breaking News Alerts

The appeals court said the State had violated that right when they used that refusal against him in the trial. On Thursday, the state’s highest court agreed.

“We agree with the court of appeals that verbally providing a cell phone passcode is a testimonial communication under the Fifth Amendment,” the state’s Supreme Court wrote in its opinion.

The Court acknowledged the circumstances surrounding Valdez’s case were unique. In their opinion, the justices wrote the case involves modern technology in a scenario that hasn’t been addressed by the United States Supreme Court yet.

“The prevalence of passcodes that encrypt the information on electronic devices – which are often seized by law enforcement while investigating criminal conduct – has raised important questions about how the Fifth Amendment extends to law enforcement’s efforts to unlock these devices and decrypt the contents inside,” The Court wrote. “These questions have proven to be especially complex where law enforcement attempts to access the contents of a seized device by means that do not require the suspect to disclose the actual passcode – like, for example, obtaining an order to compel the suspect to provide an unlocked device.”

The Utah Attorney’s General Office told ABC4 that “the office is disappointed in the court’s ruling and is evaluating options for further review.”

For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to ABC4 Utah.