“Although the encounter was initially coercive, by the time Shull asked Defendant for consent to search her car, she was standing by the car, the deputies had re-holstered their weapons, and Shull spoke with her in a calm, professional manner, as Shull testified and as evidenced by the recording of the encounter. … None of the deputies threatened or coerced Defendant or indicated in any way that she was required to consent to the search or that they would search the vehicle even if she did not consent. … Moreover, Defendant never indicated at any time that she withdrew her consent or wanted the deputies to stop the search.” The consent was valid. United States v. Maloch, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48829 (N.D. Ga. March 25, 2015).
On the whole, the consent to search given by the airman of her house was voluntary. United States v. Olson, 2015 CAAF LEXIS 326 (April 2, 2015).*
Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not calling another witness to the alleged consent to the search of the car when the police had a search warrant for the car. Consent is moot. United States v. Tucker, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48115 (E.D. Va. April 13, 2015).*