E.D.Mo.: Agreeing that officers could look in his phone and that “nothing would be found” is broad consent

Defendant consented to a search of his cell phone. “Defendant expressly directed Officer Rudolph to look in Defendant’s cellular telephone when Officer Rudolph informed Defendant that the telephone would be seized as evidence. The statement that ‘[t]here’s not going to be anything in there’ reinforces the lack of limitation with respect to the scope of consent.” United States v. Denton, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61014 (E.D. Mo. Mar. 29, 2017), adopted, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60260 (E.D. Mo. April 20, 2017)

Defendant can’t raise a search claim in a 2255 where he pled guilty and he doesn’t allege IAC. Ogunleye v. United States, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61628 (N.D. Tex. March 31, 2017).*

This entry was posted in Cell phones, Consent. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.