Inspecting the arrested person's mobile phone

This research addresses an important legal principle, namely the invalidity of evidence derived from the search of the seized mobile phone in the possession of the arrested suspect. Practical circumstances have demonstrated a divergence in criminal judgments on this matter. While these judgments may not explicitly confirm the legitimacy or invalidity of evidence obtained from the search of such devices, they tend to avoid relying on it in their rulings, basing their decisions on other matters to avoid challenge. However, the mobile phone search evidence may remain the only basis relied upon by the court, supported by other evidence, leading the judge to incorporate it in a conviction verdict. In the absence of explicit legal provisions regulating such searches and a lack of clear appellate decisions resolving this conflict, judges find themselves in a dilemma. They resort to general rules governing searches, applying them to the search of the seized mobile phone in the possession of the arrested suspect. Interpreting these general legal rules becomes the decisive factor, with each judge having their own interpretative perspective and tools, which may align or differ from their peers. The judges end up issuing verdicts based on majority opinions, even if it leads to conflicting judgments. This issue occurs due to the courts not being bound by decisions from other courts, including their own, even if it results in conflicting judgments. In this discussion, we will illustrate the stance of the American legislation and judiciary regarding the search of the seized mobile phone, followed by an examination of the Egyptian legislation and judiciary's position on this matter, along with our opinion.