People v. Sneed

This case presents question as to whether trial court properly denied State’s motion to compel defendant to provide password for his cell phone that was otherwise properly seized by police pursuant to search warrant. Trial court found that 5th Amendment privilege against self-incrimination prevented defendant from being compelled to provide passcode to his cell phone. Appellate Court, in reversing trial court, found that compelling defendant to provide access to his cell phone was neither testimonial nor incriminating for 5th Amendment purposes, and that foregone conclusion exception to 5th Amendment also applied. In his petition for leave to appeal, defendant argued that Appellate Court lacked jurisdiction to consider State’s appeal of trial court’s order, where trial court’s order did not bar any evidence from trial and prohibited only one means by which it could enforce search warrant. He also maintained that Appellate Court’s analysis of privilege against self-incrimination conflicted with decision in Spicer, 2019 IL App (3d) 170814.