LA5: PC developed in lengthy investigation excused lack of SW by inevitable discovery

It wasn’t reasonable for the police to believe that defendant’s father had apparent authority to consent to a search of locked box. However, inevitable discovery applies because the investigation was well underway, and there was probable cause for a search warrant at that point: “When all of these factors are combined, the officers possessed sufficient probable cause to obtain a search warrant for the contents of the locked box and a search warrant would have been obtained.” State v. Ables, 2017 La. App. LEXIS 172 (La.App. 5 Cir. Feb. 8, 2017).

“Based on the totality of circumstances, the Court finds reasonable person in Naylor’s position would have felt free to go about his business after Officer Hardesty returned all the paperwork and no citation was issued. The evidence shows that Naylor consented to the post-stop encounter, and therefore, the prolonging of the traffic stop in this case does not implicate the Fourth Amendment.” United States v. Naylor, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 183630 (W.D. Mo. Feb. 7, 2017).*

This entry was posted in Inevitable discovery. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.