Requires law enforcement agencies to obtain search warrants for electronic information, data, location information and other identifying information of subscribers and customers, except in specified circumstances.
H5361 creates a new chapter in Rhode Island criminal procedure law called the “Electronic Information and Data Privacy Act.” The bill generally requires law enforcement to obtain a search warrant based on probable cause before accessing the location information, stored data, transmitted data, or certain electronic information held by service providers or associated with an electronic device. It also sets out definitions for key terms such as electronic device, remote computing service, location information, and subscriber record, and it establishes rules for when data may be obtained without a warrant, including with consent, under recognized warrant exceptions, in emergencies, or in connection with certain child exploitation reports.
The bill also requires notice to the owner of the device or data after a warrant is executed, with limited authority for delayed notice when disclosure could endanger safety, jeopardize an investigation, or lead to flight or destruction of evidence. It further limits law enforcement’s ability to use or disclose non-targeted data gathered during execution of a warrant and requires prompt destruction of improperly collected information. Finally, it provides that evidence obtained in violation of the chapter is subject to exclusion rules similar to evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment and the Rhode Island Constitution.
If enacted, the bill would add a new statutory framework in Title 12 governing police access to digital records and location data, effectively raising the default standard for obtaining electronic information to a warrant requirement. It would affect law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, electronic communication service providers, remote computing service providers, and individuals whose device data or subscriber records are sought in criminal investigations. The bill also preserves certain existing public records and employer rights, and it aligns some disclosure rules with federal electronic communications law.
The available materials show no recorded committee testimony or votes, so there is no documented public debate in the provided record. Based on the bill text and caption, the measure appears to be a privacy-protective reform aimed at limiting warrantless access to digital information while preserving exceptions for emergencies and other recognized circumstances. The overall framing suggests support for stronger electronic privacy protections and clearer procedural safeguards for searches of digital data.
The main points of potential contention are the scope of the warrant requirement and the exceptions that allow warrantless access. Law enforcement interests may object to restrictions on obtaining location data, subscriber records, and stored or transmitted information without a warrant, while privacy advocates are likely to support the bill’s stronger protections and notice requirements. Specific areas that could draw debate include delayed-notice provisions, the treatment of emergency disclosures, the handling of data inadvertently discovered by providers, and the exclusion of evidence obtained in violation of the chapter.