Whether the Fourth Amendment's privacy protections prevent law enforcement from searching places where a parolee has standing but are not unambiguously the parolee's 'place of residence'

question presented, on which the circuits are now divided, is whether the Fourth Amendment’s privacy protections prevent law enforcement from searching places where a parolee has standing but at the same time are not unambiguously the parolee’s “place of residence.” The second question presented, on which the circuits disagree with this Court, is whether Fourth Amendment cell phone protections, articulated by this Court in cases like Riley v. California, 575 U.S. 373 (2014), apply to parolee searches? @