Skip to main content

Commonwealth v. Kane

Citations

  • 210 A.3d 324

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that a smartphone deliberately hidden inside a dormitory bathroom to video the people therein was “abandoned property” for constitutional purposes
  • holding that defendant did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy over cell phone that he intentionally left on and recording in a public restroom
  • explaining that a description of the general class of items to be searched may be sufficient
  • indicating a warrant must state with sufficient particularity the property to be seized and the person or place to be searched
  • affirming the trial court's finding that a cell phone was abandoned and that law enforcement therefore permissibly executed a warrantless search

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Ott, Dubow, Stevens

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.