These rules are in place to assure that evidence isn't contaminated, tampered with or manufactured ("planted").
The phone was handled by several unnamed persons, then sent by another anonymous person to an unnamed agency in another state, then returned, unlocked, to the local DA. Sounds like this happened with little or no oversight.
IMO this evidence is inadmissable.
As one prosecutor told me; "If you change one bit, I can't convict." If the data shows any tampering, it can't be used as evidence by either the prosecution or the defense in the upcoming criminal trial. However, it could be used in a civil suit showing intentional tampering with evidence and failure to follow strict rules of evidence's chain of custody.
This is a common Prosecution technique. When the evidence excupates the Defendant, then it is altered or destroyed. The court will then rule it is inadmissable which hurts the Defendant.
This is a clear case of Prosecurial Misconduct.