She didn’t commit a crime in WyCo court. Why can’t she get her confiscated phone back? | Opinion

Ri’Shauna Fielder of Kansas City, Kansas, had a choice: Turn over her mobile phone to Wyandotte County law enforcement officials or risk being arrested. Surrounded by at least six officers inside the county courthouse, she obliged. Sheriff’s deputies seized her mobile device and prosecutors later sought a warrant to search the phone for its contents.

Did Ri’Shauna disobey court rules and record or video witness testimony? No, she said, providing us with a copy of extensive handwritten notes she took Jan. 31 during a court hearing for her husband. None suggest she was up to anything nefarious inside the courtroom. Fielder was intimidated by the police presence and didn’t want to go to jail, so she turned over the phone, she told us.

Wyandotte County officials have yet to file any criminal charges against Ri’Shauna. So why, more than two months later, have authorities refused to return the phone?

That is a question that remains unanswered.

Ri’Shauna is the wife of alleged cop killer Antoine Fielder. Months have passed since Wyandotte County District Judge Bill Klapper ordered her mobile phone confiscated. Klapper has a rule: Phones must be turned off, and no audio or video recording is allowed inside the courtroom. He said as much at the start of the hearing Ri’Shauna attended in Wyandotte County District Court, according to court transcripts.

We understand the importance of courtroom protocol and decorum. Klapper has every right to confiscate recordings or hold violators in contempt of court.

But even if Ri’Shauna violated Klapper’s courtroom procedures, she did not commit a crime, her attorney said. She just wants her phone back. And barring any legal issues, Klapper should strongly consider returning Fielder’s property to her.

Ri’Shauna was attending a court proceeding involving her husband, who is facing the death penalty in the 2018 fatal shooting of Wyandotte County Sheriff’s deputies Theresa King, 44, and Patrick Rohrer, 35, during an inmate transfer near the Wyandotte County courthouse. Antoine Fielder was charged with two counts of capital murder and, if convicted, could face the death penalty.

Were Fourth Amendment rights against search and seizure violated?

Since January, at Klapper’s order, the Kansas City, Kansas Police Department has had Ri’Shauna’s cellphone in its possession. Apparently, she’ll have to wait until after her husband’s trial later this year to get it back, according to court documents we read.

That isn’t right, civil rights advocates said. Violating a judge’s order is a civil matter, not a criminal one. Only after her phone was taken did authorities seek a search warrant, a possible violation of Ri’Shauna’s Fourth Amendment right against illegal search and seizure.

The value of the Fourth Amendment is in its ability to curb abusive practices by law enforcement officials, according to Esmie Tseng of the American Civil Liberties Union of Kansas.

“The Fourth Amendment establishes deeply fundamental protections for each of us — and it’s often in the details of the order of operations of how law enforcement officers search our persons or seize our property in which violations of these protections can occur,” Tseng said.

Ri’Shauna’s phone contains privileged information from her husband and his defense attorneys, which could present its own set of legal challenges, according to other civil rights advocates we spoke with.

A forensic audit will show what authorities had access to on the phone, her attorney William Odle told us. Tech experts are on standby to examine it when it’s returned, he said.

Klapper declined to comment on his order, according to the Wyandotte County court administrator. District Attorney Mark Dupree’s office declined to comment as well. Everything related to the Antoine Fielder case is considered sealed, prosecutors contend.

What was found on Ri’Shauna’s phone, if anything? Did she take photos of witnesses — a key concern raised by Dupree, according to a transcript from the hearing? Were there any audio recordings of the proceedings?

In Wyandotte County, no law prohibits the recording of judicial proceedings. The officers’ behavior, at the judge’s direction, could prove unconstitutional. Police cannot seize items unless the item is an immediate physical threat to others, or unless there was a lawful arrest, said Edward Cantu, University of Missouri-Kansas City law professor.

And even if there is a lawful arrest and officers can seize it, officers still need to get a warrant before searching the phone.

“If recording in the courthouse is not illegal, there wouldn’t be any reason to think the phone contains evidence of a crime,” Cantu said.

In this country, authorities must establish probable cause that a crime has been committed before they are allowed to confiscate or search a person’s property.

Odle may seek relief in federal court for his client, he said.

“Why not give her back the phone?” he asked.

That is a question for law enforcement officials in Wyandotte County to answer. So far, they have remained silent.