D.Mass.: Alleged abandonment of a backpack during forced entry to arrest was involuntary

Defendant arrested by a forced entry disclaimed a backpack, and the court finds this alleged abandonment was involuntary. But he later consented to the search. United States v. Bey, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139581 (D. Mass. October 1, 2014):

To begin with, the Court disagrees with the government that Bey voluntarily abandoned his privacy interests in the backpack. “It is well established that one who abandons or disclaims ownership of an item forfeits any claim of privacy in its contents, and that as to that person the police may search the item without a warrant.” United States v. De Los Santos Ferrer, 999 F.2d 7, 9 (1st Cir. 1993). Numerous courts have emphasized, however, that the abandonment or disclaimer of ownership must be a “voluntary act.” United States v. Gwinn, 191 F.3d 874, 877 (8th Cir. 1999); see also United States v. Austin, 66 F.3d 1115, 1118 (10th Cir. 1995) (holding that “[a]n abandonment must be voluntary”); United States v. Garzon, 119 F.3d 1446, 1451 (10th Cir. 1997) (“Abandonment will not be recognized when it is the result of prior illegal police conduct.”); State v. Harbison, 156 P.3d 30, 35 (N.M. 2007) (“Because Defendant had not abandoned the evidence before he was seized, Fourth Amendment protections apply to the evidence.”). In Gwinn, for example, the defendant’s denial of ownership over a duffel bag came after he was seized and handcuffed by the police. 191 F.3d at 877. “Given this scenario,” the Court concluded, “[his] actions can hardly be characterized as a voluntary act.” Id.

As in Gwinn, the Court concludes that Bey’s disclaimer of ownership was not a voluntary act. The exchange between Bey and police regarding ownership of the backpack took place just minutes after the police entered Summons’s home unannounced and arrested Bey at gunpoint. During his arrest, police also brandished their guns at Bey and told him to lie still and show them his hands. Importantly, the police also did not inform Bey of any of his Miranda rights, including his right to remain silent. Lying handcuffed on the floor with guns pointed at him, Bey’s responses to the police’s interrogation cannot be considered “the voluntary product of a free and unconstrained will.” Haynes v. Washington, 373 U.S. 503, 514 (1963).