Judge Santiago Pedraz has ordered a second forensic extraction of the iPhone 15 Pro Max belonging to Juan Manuel Serrano, former president of Correos and former chief of staff to Pedro Sánchez, in the “Leire” case. The Guardia Civil’s Central Operative Unit (UCO) carried out the procedure with Serrano and his lawyer present, addressing his objection that neither had attended the initial extraction.
The UCO seized the phone on 27 May 2026, before Serrano was formally placed under investigation. On 10 July, after receiving a UCO report, Pedraz named him as a person under investigation over alleged links to two strands of the inquiry: suspected irregularities involving public contracts and the state holding company Sociedad Estatal de Participaciones Industriales (SEPI), and alleged efforts to interfere with judicial proceedings considered damaging to the PSOE or the government. These remain allegations under investigation.
Serrano’s defense has challenged both the seizure and the first forensic copy. It argues that the initial data extraction took place without him or his lawyer present and before he was formally under investigation. The defense has sought to have the seizure and cloning declared null. Conducted with both present, the second extraction is intended to address that procedural dispute and support the integrity of the digital evidence in the court record.
The second procedure involved making a bit-by-bit copy of the device’s memory, including deleted files, with forensic tools such as those developed by Cellebrite. The account of the procedure also describes access to data stored in apps including Google Maps and WhatsApp* (принадлежит Metа, которая признана экстремистской организацией и запрещена в РФ) through a court-authorized rooting process. A repeat extraction does not, by itself, settle whether the first copy is admissible or whether the original phone should remain in judicial custody.
The phone’s custody has prompted separate court decisions. Pedraz initially ordered its return on 7 September 2026, after finding that relevant information was already in the proceedings, but reversed that decision on 16 September after accepting an appeal by Anticorruption prosecutors. Prosecutors Elisa Lamelas and Mar Scharfhausen argued that the handset remained “potentially relevant” and had an objective connection to the events under investigation. They also maintained that a forensic copy does not automatically make the original device unnecessary: the phone itself may remain a material item of evidence and a source of information.
Investigators have cited numerous messages exchanged between Serrano and Leire Díez as evidence of the phone’s continuing relevance. A UCO report also linked Serrano, while he was president of Correos, to Díez’s appointment at the state-owned postal company in late 2021. The report said the appointment was apparently handled through Serrano and referred to a May 2021 conversation in which Díez’s position at Correos was allegedly discussed with him. Prosecutors have argued that the device could hold material relevant to the wider inquiry, including its examination of alleged influence-peddling and conduct involving public contracts.
The initial seizure took place amid a broader investigation that included searches at the PSOE’s federal headquarters on Calle Ferraz and at the homes of other figures, including former PSOE Organization Secretary Santos Cerdán and former Andalusian government official Gaspar Zarrías. The inquiry has also examined alleged attempts to affect judicial cases involving the PSOE and the government, including communications referring to retired commissioner José Manuel Villarejo as “el de la boina.”
Digital forensic procedures are basic to disputes over the authenticity and handling of electronic evidence. Hash codes and certified forensic software can help document whether data changes during examination, while the judicial process determines how the material may be used. In this case, the contested first extraction, the repeat procedure with Serrano and his lawyer present, and the continued custody of the original handset are related but distinct issues. The case’s wider implications for legal procedure and political controversy are also reflected in Ceuta’s legal standoff with Madrid.
The “Leire” case concerns alleged public-contract irregularities and efforts to influence judicial proceedings. The dispute over Serrano’s phone focuses attention on how digital material is collected and assessed in a politically sensitive investigation. The second extraction is intended to strengthen the procedural basis for examining the device; the court’s decisions on custody and the evidentiary status of the data remain separate questions.
