E.D.Mo.: By calling police to a home invasion robbery, defendant consented to entries

Defendant called the police because he was the victim of a home invasion robbery. That investigation also turned into an investigation of defendant for drug possession. Officers returned the next day to talk about the home invasion, but they also had in mind defendant’s own potential offense. It was objectively reasonable to bring along the additional officer. And, they did, in fact, find an additional shell casing and took measurements of bullet holes, and drug packaging was found in a trash can. By calling the police about the home invasion, defendant essentially invited a full investigation into what happened. United States v. Grim, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150436 (E.D. Mo. September 16, 2014).

Defendant’s arrest was with probable cause, so his post-arrest statements were properly admitted. United States v. Rucker, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 20298 (11th Cir. October 21, 2014).*

The driver of a vehicle, although not the owner, was shown to have objective apparent authority to consent to its a search. United States v. Helton, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150563 (E.D. Tenn. October 23, 2014),* R&R 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151853 (E.D. Tenn. August 11, 2014).*

This entry was posted in Apparent authority, Arrest or entry on arrest, Consent. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.