Editor’s note: This story has been updated with the judge’s ruling.

YOUNGSTOWN, Ohio (WKBN) — Two law enforcement officers admitted Wednesday during a suppression hearing in Mahoning County Common Pleas Court that they did not have a search warrant when they seized a phone from a former Poland Township school resource officer under investigation for having an inappropriate relationship with a high school student.

Prosecutors, however, have said that a warrant was not needed to seize the phone of Steve Kent on June 8 because they were relying on case law that says they can take the phone before a warrant is obtained to search it if they have a reasonable fear that a suspect can delete information before the warrant can be obtained.

Judge John Durkin agreed with prosecutors and ruled that the evidence was admissible.

Kent, who is also an Austintown trustee, was indicted last April by a grand jury on three counts of sexual battery and an additional charge of tampering with evidence.

Kent worked as a resource officer since 2013 before investigators received a complaint on June 7 that Kent had been involved in a sexual relationship with a student at Poland High School.

Township police asked the state Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation to handle the case to avoid any conflicts of interest.

As part of their investigation, an agent with the state Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation took Kent’s phone on June 8 but did not get a warrant to search the phone until June 9.

Kent’s attorney, John Juhasz, had filed a motion to suppress any evidence from Kent’s phone because investigators seized it without a warrant.

Special Agent Brian Carlini of BCI testified that Kent gave him his phone willingly and also supplied the passcode when asked. Carlini then said he put the phone in airplane mode and slipped it into an evidence bag. It was not searched until a warrant was obtained the next day.

Carlini said that when a phone is in airplane mode, it can not be accessed remotely by someone looking to delete or uninstall data. He added that has been done before.

Carlini also testified that the victim in the case had told him that Kent had a habit of deleting messages or uninstalling apps on his phone.

A notice of intent to use evidence in the case file said investigators reviewed both Kent’s phone and the phone of the student who made the accusation. The motion noted the victim gave investigators consent to search her phone.

The notice of intent said investigators found evidence on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, SnapChat and LifeForce 360.

Carlini said Kent was read his Miranda rights by Carlini after he relinquished his phone, but he declined to make a statement to investigators.

The case will go to trial at a later date.