Brief filed: 02/24/2025
Documents
Snap v. Pina
Supreme Court of California; Case No. S286267
Argument(s)
We think this case can be decided simply by finding the Stored Communications Act (SCA), 18 U.S.C. § 2701 et seq., does not impliedly create an unqualified evidentiary privilege for “electronic communication service” providers, including social media companies. Courts’ interpretation of the Stored Communications Act (SCA) carries momentous implications for the ability of people across the country to defend themselves against criminal accusations. As the type and amount of material shared online balloons, evidence obtained from social media plays an increasingly prominent role in criminal trials. Social media content holds equal, if not even greater, import for the accused mounting a defense. Yet, unlike law enforcement, they are regularly denied access to messages, photos, and videos essential to their defenses based on the extrapolative interpretation of the SCA advanced by petitioners.
Author(s)
Donald E. Landis, Law Office Of Donald E. Landis, Jr., Carmel, CA; Kathleen Guneratne, Alameda Public Defenders Office, Oakland, Aa; John T. Philipsborn, Law Offices Of J.T. Philipsborn, San Francisco, CA; MartÃn Antonio Sabelli, Law Offices Of MartÃn Sabelli, San Francisco, CA, Jerome D. Greco, The Legal Aid Society, New York, NY; Tania Brief, Innocence Project, Inc, New York, NY; Stan German, New York County Defender Services, New York, NY; Heather E. Williams, The Federal Defenders Office For The Eastern District Of California, Sacramento, CA; Paul Blocker, Dallas County Public Defender Office, Dallas, TX; Richard Mauro, The Salt Lake Legal Defender Association, Salt Lake City, UT
