News & Insights

Facts of the Case

• Background: Law enforcement stopped Adamou Djibo, suspected of orchestrating an international heroin smuggling operation, as he attempted to leave the U.S. at JFK Airport.
• Search and Seizure: Agents asked Djibo for the passcode to his iPhone, claiming it was part of a border currency search. They later used a forensic tool to extract detailed data from the phone without a warrant.
• Discovered Evidence: Texts, emails, and WhatsApp messages revealed coded communications and potentially incriminating information.
• Procedural Issues: Djibo moved to suppress the evidence obtained from his phone, arguing that:
  • He was interrogated without being properly informed of his rights (a Miranda violation).
  • The search of his phone violated Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches.

Court’s Analysis

Miranda Violation:

• The court found that Djibo was effectively in custody when agents asked for his phone passcode, as he was isolated in a private area and unable to leave.
• Because he was not informed of his Miranda rights, his statement providing the passcode was deemed inadmissible.

Fourth Amendment Violation:

• The court ruled that the warrantless search of Djibo’s phone was unconstitutional.
• While border searches are an exception to the Fourth Amendment, this exception did not apply because the search went beyond the scope of checking for contraband (e.g., drugs or currency) and lacked a connection to border security.

“Fruit of the Poisonous Tree”:

• The initial illegal search (dubbed a “peek”) influenced subsequent searches, making the later warrant-based search invalid.
• The court concluded that law enforcement improperly relied on information gathered from the illegal initial search.

Inevitable Discovery Rejected:

• The government argued that it could have accessed the phone without Djibo’s passcode using hacking tools.
• The court rejected this, citing unreliable evidence about the tools’ capabilities and risks.