There’s no question that when most people send a message on Facebook or another social media account, they assume that their messages are private. They also typically understand that what they post or comment on can be made public, but their messages should be private. A recent court case brought this entire concept into question.

A defense attorney wanted access to the alleged victim’s Facebook account

The case in question was a criminal case in California. It involved a man who was staying in a home of a friend. When his friend came home on the day in question, he claims found the defendant on the couch with a gun. The owner of the property asked the defendant to leave, at which point the defendant allegedly shot the owner of the home.

The victim posted extensively on social media about his medical recovery as well as the criminal case. He’d also written in the past about having guns, using drugs, and having a desire to rob people and kill them. The criminal defense attorney of the accused though that this information was relevant to the case and subpoenaed all his Facebook posts, photos, private messages, etc.

Facebook fought the subpoena

Upon receiving the subpoena, Facebook requested that the court rescind it. Their argument was that it violated what’s known as the Stored Communications Act and that a search warrant was required. The lawyers of the accused said that the rights of their client to a free trial trumped the rights provided within the Stored Communications Act. They also stated that it was difficult to get a warrant in part because the prosecution wasn’t cooperating.

The situation was settled and then appealed with a different income

Initially, the court decided in favor of the defendant. However, Facebook appealed and the case went all the way to the 4th District Court of Appeals. They reversed the decision and said that criminal defendants do not have rights to obtain social media information of their alleged victims.

The court further stated that the Stored Communications Act sufficiently restricted any third-party website – including Facebook – from disclosing the information of users without a warrant. They indicated that the case of this particular defendant was not an exception.

There is still a question about the long-term decision

The rule of the appellate court is consistent with a similar ruling by an appellate court involving a case in San Francisco. That case involved a defendant with a subpoena against Facebook that was overturned by the appellate court. Together these rulings are clear that a person accused of committing a crime does not have a legal right to social media information of their alleged victims.

The case may not be settled for good though – the California Supreme Court will be hearing an appeal to the case in San Francisco. What they decide will affect both cases discussed above.

Are you dealing with a criminal case? Is it complicated by a variety of issues? Do you need help from an experienced criminal defense attorney? If so, reach out to Law Office of Michael L. Fell at (949) 585-9055 to set up a legal consultation.