S.D.N.Y.: Not reading the consent form doesn’t make it involuntary; neither does threat to “tear the place apart,” which was disputed

The fact defendant didn’t read the consent form doesn’t make it involuntary. Not reading it was defendant’s choice. “This leaves the agents’ purported threat to ‘tear the apartment apart’ if they obtained a warrant — something the Government contends never happened. Such a statement does not in and of itself render her consent involuntary. Courts must evaluate threatening statements in the broader context in which they were made, considering how the words would reasonably be interpreted.” United States v. Mirilishvili, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136424 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 1, 2015).

The dashcam video shows that the driver consented to the search of the rented vehicle. This defendant didn’t have standing in the vehicle. United States v. Murillo-Salgado, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137448 (W.D.Mo. Oct. 8, 2015),* R&R 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137514 (W.D.Mo. Sept. 8, 2015).*

Defendant filed a general motion to suppress which didn’t allege what evidence was illegally obtained or how it was illegal. The search was with a warrant, and, based on the government’s discovery, the warrant was with probable cause and phone records were obtained by subpoena. United States v. Ledbetter, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137643 (S.D.Ohio Oct. 8, 2015).*