A 27-year-old woman who crashed her car into a tree in Salem -- injuring herself, her friend and the five children in the back seat -- didn’t want to give police any help in building a criminal case against her.

Police wanted to search the contents of an iPhone they found in Catrice Pittman’s purse, but she never confirmed whether it was hers and wasn’t offering up a passcode. Her defense attorney argued forcing her to do so would violate her rights against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article 1 Section 12 of the Oregon Constitution.

But a Marion County judge sided with police and prosecutors by ordering Pittman to enter her passcode. On Wednesday, the Oregon Court of Appeals agreed with that ruling -- in a first-of-its-kind opinion for an appeals court in this state.

The ruling likely will make it easier for police in Oregon to gain access to the contents of suspects’ cellphones -- and the massive amount of personal information they contain, including photos, videos, internet searches, texts and phone contact lists of everyone that the phone’s owner has contacted and when.

“The upshot of this case is when police have a warrant to get information off a cellphone and the government knows the phone is yours and you have the passcode, then the court can compel you to enter the passcode,” said Sarah Laidlaw, a deputy public defender who represented Pittman on appeal.

Ryan Scott, a criminal defense attorney in Portland who isn’t associated with Pittman’s case but closely follows appeals cases, said the ruling is an example of a continuing erosion of rights.

"Our rights are a little less than they were yesterday. But for those of us following this area of law it’s not a surprise,” he said. Federal case law has been leaning this way for the past few years, he said.

Scott said the ruling won’t affect many Oregon defendants whose phones are seized by police because police already have technology that allows them to crack into most of those phones. But sometimes, like with Pittman’s phone, police just can’t get in.

The latest iPhones, more often than other phones, have proven difficult, Scott said.

“For people who want their information private, I would recommend getting an iPhone,” Scott said. “And Apple is not paying me to say that.”

Pittman had argued that punching in her passcode would amount to “testifying” against herself because doing so would effectively admit that the iPhone was hers and she knew the passcode. But the Court of Appeals ruled that because police already had good reason to believe the phone was hers given its location in her purse, the fact that she knew its passcode was already a “foregone conclusion.” In other words, she could be compelled to cooperate as an exception to her constitutional rights.

When Marion County Circuit Judge Tracy Prall ordered Pittman to enter her passcode in August 2016, Pittman twice punched in “123456.” That wasn’t the correct code. Prall found Pittman in contempt of court and sentenced her to 30 days in jail.

Pittman ultimately was sentenced to more than 11 years in prison for the June 2016 crash that left her adult friend and the five children, ages 2 to 10, with wounds that included internal injuries, bruises, cuts and a broken leg, wrist, arm. Hospital staff who treated Pittman for a broken nose found a baggie of methamphetamine, a number of empty bags and $1,230 on her or in her purse -- and she admitted to using meth that night, according to the prosecution.

Pittman pleaded guilty to driving under the influence of intoxicants and five counts of second- and third-degree assault. Another charge that the prosecution had been pursuing and had been hoping to bolster with evidence from Pittman’s iPhone -- that she was allegedly dealing methamphetamine -- was dismissed.

A three-judge panel of the Appeals Court ruled on the case: Erika Hadlock, Roger DeHoog and Robyn Aoyagi.

-- Aimee Green

agreen@oregonian.com

o_aimee

Visit subscription.oregonlive.com/newsletters to get Oregonian/OregonLive journalism delivered to your email inbox.