Is a search reasonable under the 4th Amendment when a probation officer lacks required reasonable suspicion and violates state law to search a probationer's cell phone?

Questions Presented 1. Isa search reasonable under the 4° Amendment when a probation officer who lacks required reasonable suspicion and is in violation of Ohio Revised Code R.C. 2951.02(A) subjects a probationer to a search of his cell phone and other digital devices, which are not subject to his specific search conditions? 2. Does the word “property” in a probationer’s Terms and Conditions of Community Control encompass a cell phone when the conditions include an “Electronics Search Condition” that the probationer was not subject to? 3. Two Fourth Amendment doctrinal frameworks govern the relationship between state actors and individuals subject to state supervision following release from prison. One arises from the Supreme Court's decision in Griffin v. Wisconsin and the other from the Court's decision in United States v. Knights. Can a state court determine the reasonableness of a search without first testing it by either of these two frameworks?