Category Archives: Consent

TN: Def consented to a full patdown and admitted he had a crackpipe

The officer could tell the driver to get out of the car in a traffic stop. Defendant then consented to a full patdown that produced a crack pipe. When the officer touched it and asked what it was, defendant freely … Continue reading →

Posted in Abandonment, Arrest or entry on arrest, Consent | Comments Off on TN: Def consented to a full patdown and admitted he had a crackpipe

D.Mont.: “he’s not fucking here—go fucking look” was consent to enter

The government met its burden of proof that defendants consented to entry into their house to look for a wanted man by their saying “he’s not fucking here—go fucking look” and “he’s not fucking in there—go ahead.” United States v. … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Search incident | Comments Off on D.Mont.: “he’s not fucking here—go fucking look” was consent to enter

D.N.M.: “Brady does not require the United States to disclose impeachment evidence before suppression hearings.”

“Brady does not require the United States to disclose impeachment evidence before suppression hearings.” United States v. Deleon, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9688 (D.N.M. Jan. 21, 2020). Defendant’s motion to suppress for lack of nexus between defendant’s home and possession … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Nexus | Comments Off on D.N.M.: “Brady does not require the United States to disclose impeachment evidence before suppression hearings.”

TN: License to enter Bonaroo music festival included search waiver; no REP

Defendant’s campsite at the Bonaroo music festival and his car were searched on the authority of the license granted by the ticket which said that everybody there was subject to search. Because of that, his campsite had no reasonable expectation … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Excessive force | Comments Off on TN: License to enter Bonaroo music festival included search waiver; no REP

D.N.M.: Handing back paperwork during stop and then calling def by name led to consensual extension of stop

Defendant was validly stopped for going 3 mph over the speed limit determined by radar. After handing defendant back his paperwork, and saying he could leave, the officer called out his name and kept him there. The court finds this … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent | Comments Off on D.N.M.: Handing back paperwork during stop and then calling def by name led to consensual extension of stop

MO: Dashcam video leaves no doubt as to voluntariness of consent

“Burns does not dispute the traffic stop’s validity. Credibility is not at issue in the dashcam video, in which Burns freely consents to a vehicle search and which flatly refutes Burns’ claims of involuntariness and illegal post-stop detention. That ends … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on MO: Dashcam video leaves no doubt as to voluntariness of consent

D.S.D.: Cross corroboration of three CIs’ stories was PC

The cross corroboration of three CIs’ stories was probable cause. United States v. Wilford, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6074 (D.S.D. Jan. 14, 2020). “The officers had probable cause to arrest Mancilla-Ibarra because Fann’s information was veritable, reliable, and corroborated.” The … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Informant hearsay | Comments Off on D.S.D.: Cross corroboration of three CIs’ stories was PC

KS: Def’s actions after the police entry and signing the consent form clearly show voluntariness

“We note, however, that Daino’s acts after the officers entered his residence confirm, instead of refute, his intent to consent to their entry. Daino never protested the officers’ presence. Instead, he later opened a safe for the officers, agreed officers … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on KS: Def’s actions after the police entry and signing the consent form clearly show voluntariness

D.N.M.: Govt fails in burden of showing consent. Was “yes” acknowledgement of statement to def or assent to search?

The government fails in its burden to show consent to a patdown of defendant’s person. There was a language barrier, and previous questions and statements were translated, but this one wasn’t. “Even though that defendant said ‘yes’ in response to … Continue reading →

Posted in Border search, Consent, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.N.M.: Govt fails in burden of showing consent. Was “yes” acknowledgement of statement to def or assent to search?

OH8: When police at door ask to come in and the occupant stands back and aside, that implies permission and consent

When defendant opened the door and police were there and asked for admission, stepping back and aside implied consent to enter. Police then did a proper protective sweep of the room. City of Westlake v. Dudas, 2020-Ohio-31, 2020 Ohio App. … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent | Comments Off on OH8: When police at door ask to come in and the occupant stands back and aside, that implies permission and consent

D.Haw.: USMJ’s prior civil case involving defendant didn’t make him not “neutral and detached”

The USMJ was involved in a prior qui tam civil case by defendant. Defendant in a later criminal case argues that the USMJ should have been disqualified from considering a search warrant affidavit for her property that led to the … Continue reading →

Posted in Abstention, Consent, Neutral and detached magistrate | Comments Off on D.Haw.: USMJ’s prior civil case involving defendant didn’t make him not “neutral and detached”

FL2: Standing aside when answering door for police as to whether someone is inside is consent to entry by action

When police are at the door and ask for a person, and the person answering the door steps aside, it is apparent authority to enter that the wanted person is inside. State v. Smith, 2019 Fla. App. LEXIS 19116 (Fla. … Continue reading →

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Consent | Comments Off on FL2: Standing aside when answering door for police as to whether someone is inside is consent to entry by action

CA3: Consent to search car moots possible mistake of fact motion to suppress

Defendant’s consent to a search of his car after a traffic stop moots the issue that the stop was based on a mistake of fact. United States v. Prado, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 38445 (3d Cir. Dec. 24, 2019).* Facebook’s … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Reasonableness, Social media warrants | Comments Off on CA3: Consent to search car moots possible mistake of fact motion to suppress

MI remands for an evidentiary hearing on actual or apparent authority

The court of appeals is reversed and the case remanded to the trial court for a hearing on actual and apparent authority and the reasonableness of the officer’s belief there was any authority at all, actual or apparent. People v. … Continue reading →

Posted in Apparent authority, Consent | Comments Off on MI remands for an evidentiary hearing on actual or apparent authority

CO: When a person with apparent authority consents, an objection from another comes too late

Once one with apparent authority consents and the search starts, the other person’s finally objecting to the search comes too late. Williams v. People, 2019 CO 108, 2019 Colo. LEXIS 1280 (Dec. 23, 2019). Syllabus by the court:

Posted in Consent, Scope of search | Comments Off on CO: When a person with apparent authority consents, an objection from another comes too late

D.N.M.: Lack of audible response on bodycam of request for consent leads court to conclude govt failed in its burden of proof

In another case involving a DEA’s interaction with a bus passenger in Albuquerque, the officer was friendly enough, but the parting colloquy was “Thank you. Thank you very much, sir. Sir, would you give me permission just to pat you … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Inevitable discovery, Inventory | Comments Off on D.N.M.: Lack of audible response on bodycam of request for consent leads court to conclude govt failed in its burden of proof

FL2: Herring permits one police mistake for good faith, but not two

The officer gave a wrong name to police communications, and then communications gave a wrong answer back. Two mistakes was too much for Herring, and the exclusionary rule is applied. One mistake may be attenuation; two is not. State v. … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Exclusionary rule | Comments Off on FL2: Herring permits one police mistake for good faith, but not two

CA6: Def let a man into his house to talk to his wife; he was a plainclothes officer who didn’t ID himself and saw def handle a firearm, and def was a felon; no deception for entry

“While at home on a cold November morning, William Wooden heard a knock at the door. Upon opening it, Wooden was greeted by a man asking to speak with Wooden’s wife. Wooden went to get her. And he allowed the … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on CA6: Def let a man into his house to talk to his wife; he was a plainclothes officer who didn’t ID himself and saw def handle a firearm, and def was a felon; no deception for entry

W.D.Pa.: Four prior controlled buys and def’s arrival at location for another was PC

Officers had four controlled buys and defendants were arriving at a predetermined location for another one. That was probable cause. United States v. Boxley, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 214715 (W.D. Pa. Dec. 13, 2019).* Consent to search the premises was … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Probable cause, Qualified immunity | Comments Off on W.D.Pa.: Four prior controlled buys and def’s arrival at location for another was PC

D.Neb.: Def consented to a dog sniff, but there was RS anyway

The stop was based on a traffic violation, and reasonable suspicion developed for a dog sniff. In addition, defendant was asked to consent to a dog sniff and did: “When initially asked for consent, Defendant responded, ‘I guess so, I … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Dog sniff, Franks doctrine | Comments Off on D.Neb.: Def consented to a dog sniff, but there was RS anyway