TX1: Mere acquiescence can still be consent[!]

While the Texas standard of consent is clear and convincing evidence, “even a finding of ‘“[m]ere acquiescence” may constitute a finding of consent.’ Meekins, 340 S.W.3d at 463-64.” [apparently even though SCOTUS says no]. Hutchins v. State, 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 9430 (Tex. App. – Houston (1st Dist.) September 3, 2015) (dissent here).

Even if the stop was pretextual, it had a factual basis so it’s valid. The patdown was valid and led to an immediate plain feel which was also valid. United States v. Pacheco, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 117786 (S.D.Ohio September 3, 2015).*

A silver Camry with Pennsylvania license plates was seen involved in a freeway shooting. When the car matching the description was found, that was reasonable suspicion. State v. Volpe, 2015 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 720 (September 3, 2015).*

This entry was posted in Consent, Pretext, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.