N.D.Cal.: Consent given after threat to search was involuntary where search would have violated Fourth Amendment

Defendant consented to a search of a his backpack after he was told it was going to be searched. The problem with the search was that the search would have violated the Fourth Amendment. Therefore, the consent was invalid, as was defendant’s admission he was a felon in possession. United States v. Howard, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3140 (N.D.Cal. Jan. 8, 2016):

In this case, a highway patrol officer announced he was going to search a suspect’s backpack. That search would have violated the Fourth Amendment, because the officer did not have a warrant to search the backpack, and no exception to the warrant requirement applied at the time the officer made his announcement. In response to the officer’s threat, the suspect confessed to being a felon and having a gun in the backpack. The government has now charged him with being a felon in possession of a firearm. But the government may not use in court evidence that an officer obtains through a threat to violate the Fourth Amendment. Kentucky v. King, 563 U.S. 452, 462-63, 131 S. Ct. 1849, 179 L. Ed. 2d 865 (2011); United States v. Saafir, 754 F.3d 262, 266 (4th Cir. 2014). Therefore, the evidence the officer obtained as a result of his threat (specifically, the confession and the gun) must be suppressed.