OH5: Consent was invalid when def was told she’d only be charged with tampering if she didn’t disclose the heroin on her person

The evidence supported the trial court’s finding that defendant’s consent to search was not freely and voluntarily given because the officer’s explanation to defendant incorrectly intimated that she could be charged with tampering with evidence if it was concealed on her person and she did not affirmatively point it out to the police. Instead she was charged with the drugs. State v. Myer, 2017-Ohio-1046, 2017 Ohio App. LEXIS 1023 (5th Dist. March 22, 2017).

The continuation of defendant’s stop was by consent. He was unequivocally told it was over and he could go but he continued to talk. People v. West, 2017 IL App (3d) 130802, 2017 Ill. App. LEXIS 159 (March 23, 2017).*

This entry was posted in Consent. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.