Balancing Self-Incrimination and Public Safety: A Comparative Analysis of Compelled Smartphone Unlocking in Brazilian and U.S. Legal Systems

IF 0.4 Q3 LAW
Rafael Francisco França
{"title":"Balancing Self-Incrimination and Public Safety: A Comparative Analysis of Compelled Smartphone Unlocking in Brazilian and U.S. Legal Systems","authors":"Rafael Francisco França","doi":"10.22197/rbdpp.v9i3.867","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study compares how the laws in the United States and Brazil handle the use of digital evidence from smartphones in initial criminal investigations. The main goal is to understand the challenges when trying to protect the right to avoid self-incrimination while also ensuring public safety. By looking at court decisions from 2014 to 2023, the study explores how the legal systems in both countries deal with arguments for and against law enforcement being able to unlock smartphones against the will of the owner. The main issue being examined is the balance between respecting citizens' privacy rights and making sure defendants get fair treatment in the legal process. The research question driving this study is: How do Brazil and the U.S. manage the situation where law enforcement needs to unlock smartphones, while also respecting constitutional rights and public safety? To answer this question, the study looks at recent court cases from both countries and identifies important arguments about forced smartphone unlocking. The findings show problems in these legal proceedings, particularly when it comes to protecting the privacy of smartphone users and defendants' rights. A key point that comes out is that when law enforcement examines suspects' phones, it can jeopardize the proper handling of evidence and the right against self-incrimination that's protected by the Constitution. The study highlights shortcomings in the responses of the Supreme Courts of Brazil and the United States. This suggests a need for a more detailed framework that can address these challenges better and solve disagreements in lower courts. In essence, this article discusses the conflict between privacy rights and self-incrimination on one hand, and the government's duty to maintain public safety and prevent illegal evidence on the other. In conclusion, this article explores the legal issues around forced smartphone unlocking in Brazil and the United States. It not only emphasizes the importance of balancing individual rights with public safety but also calls for a more comprehensive legal approach to deal with these challenges effectively.","PeriodicalId":41933,"journal":{"name":"Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal","volume":"29 10","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v9i3.867","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study compares how the laws in the United States and Brazil handle the use of digital evidence from smartphones in initial criminal investigations. The main goal is to understand the challenges when trying to protect the right to avoid self-incrimination while also ensuring public safety. By looking at court decisions from 2014 to 2023, the study explores how the legal systems in both countries deal with arguments for and against law enforcement being able to unlock smartphones against the will of the owner. The main issue being examined is the balance between respecting citizens' privacy rights and making sure defendants get fair treatment in the legal process. The research question driving this study is: How do Brazil and the U.S. manage the situation where law enforcement needs to unlock smartphones, while also respecting constitutional rights and public safety? To answer this question, the study looks at recent court cases from both countries and identifies important arguments about forced smartphone unlocking. The findings show problems in these legal proceedings, particularly when it comes to protecting the privacy of smartphone users and defendants' rights. A key point that comes out is that when law enforcement examines suspects' phones, it can jeopardize the proper handling of evidence and the right against self-incrimination that's protected by the Constitution. The study highlights shortcomings in the responses of the Supreme Courts of Brazil and the United States. This suggests a need for a more detailed framework that can address these challenges better and solve disagreements in lower courts. In essence, this article discusses the conflict between privacy rights and self-incrimination on one hand, and the government's duty to maintain public safety and prevent illegal evidence on the other. In conclusion, this article explores the legal issues around forced smartphone unlocking in Brazil and the United States. It not only emphasizes the importance of balancing individual rights with public safety but also calls for a more comprehensive legal approach to deal with these challenges effectively.
平衡自证其罪和公共安全:巴西和美国法律体系中强制智能手机解锁的比较分析
这项研究比较了美国和巴西的法律如何处理在初步刑事调查中使用智能手机的数字证据。主要目标是了解在试图保护避免自证其罪的权利同时确保公共安全时所面临的挑战。通过研究2014年至2023年的法院判决,该研究探讨了两国的法律体系如何处理支持和反对执法部门违背用户意愿解锁智能手机的争论。正在审查的主要问题是尊重公民隐私权和确保被告在法律程序中得到公平对待之间的平衡。推动这项研究的研究问题是:巴西和美国如何管理执法部门需要解锁智能手机的情况,同时尊重宪法权利和公共安全?为了回答这个问题,这项研究研究了两国最近的法庭案件,并找出了关于强制智能手机解锁的重要论点。调查结果显示,这些法律程序存在问题,尤其是在保护智能手机用户隐私和被告权利方面。其中的一个关键点是,当执法部门检查嫌疑人的手机时,可能会危及证据的妥善处理和宪法保护的反对自证其罪的权利。这项研究突出了巴西和美国最高法院在应对方面的不足。这表明需要一个更详细的框架,以更好地应对这些挑战,并解决下级法院的分歧。从本质上讲,本文讨论了隐私权与自证其罪之间的冲突,以及政府维护公共安全和防止非法证据的义务。综上所述,本文探讨了巴西和美国围绕强制智能手机解锁的法律问题。它不仅强调了平衡个人权利与公共安全的重要性,而且还呼吁采取更全面的法律办法来有效地应对这些挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
66.70%
发文量
45
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信