A stipulation of Payne’s parole agreement was that he be willing to provide a passcode to his devices, though that agreement didn’t explicitly refer to biometric data. However, the panel said the evidence from his phone was lawfully acquired “because it required no cognitive exertion, placing it in the same category as a blood draw or a fingerprint taken at booking, and merely provided [police] with access to a source of potential information.”
These both seem like bad calls. You have a right to privacy, right? And for police to access your files/home/phone tap requires obtaining a warrant.
Fingerprints at booking gives access to public records. Not your own personal private data. Pretty sure drawing blood is justified suspicion of DUI.
Yes and no. When you take parole, you agree to give up some freedoms in exchange for getting out of prison early. For example, taking drug tests, checking in with your parole officer, or not leaving the state/country. If your crime was related to using a phone or something, like being a drug dealer, then it can make sense to have to allow your parole officer to check it.
So after you have been convicted of a crime, you will have restrictions based on that crime. That's a world of difference from pulling over Bob and forcing him to unlock his phone.