N.D.Okla.: Police unlawful entry onto the curtilage didn’t void consent to search phone or house

Police officers entered the curtilage going to defendant’s side yard. They did not, however, unconstitutionally cause his abandonment of the package of drugs that he was expecting by his denials that he was receiving any package. Defendant also was talked into unlocking his cell phone to show text messages. The government’s burden here is higher because they were on the curtilage, but the court still finds that his opening the phone and showing text messages was by consent. On consent to search defendant’s home, the court credits the officers’ version and finds it voluntary. United States v. Do, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147904 (N.D. Okla. October 17, 2014).*

The search warrant was for 137 but also mentioned 117 was on the building. It was actually 117, and the warrant was particular enough. State v. Powell, 2014 La. App. LEXIS 2496 (La.App. 4 Cir. October 15, 2014).*

Failure to renew a motion to suppress when the evidence is offered is a waiver. State v. Tharp, 22 Neb. App. 454. 2014 Neb. App. LEXIS 165 (October 14, 2014).

This entry was posted in Abandonment, Cell phones, Consent, Particularity. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.