N.D.N.Y.: Driving on to BOP grounds past a sign that said car was subject to search was consent; there was also RS

Defendant drove on to the grounds of an FCI, and he acted suspicious. His stop was justified by reasonable suspicion. Also, the stop and search were justified by a 6′ x 10′ sign that warned defendant the vehicle was subject to search. United States v. Parker, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69056 (N.D. N.Y. August 7, 2009).*

Consent does not require notice to the accused that he can refuse consent. United States v. Vaghari, 653 F. Supp. 2d 537 (E.D. Pa. 2009).*

The defendant was not stopped when an officer pulled up next to him while he was walking on the sidewalk and talked to him. United States v. West, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69298 (D. Ariz. July 29, 2009):

The officers initiated the encounter with Mr. West by stopping their patrol vehicle by the side of a public street, parallel to Mr. West’s path of travel. The Tahoe’s position did not impede Mr. West’s travel on the sidewalk, nor did the officers order Mr. West to stop either verbally or by signaling with the Tahoe’s siren and overhead lights. The officers asked to have a word with Mr. West and confirmed that he had not done anything wrong, stating that they were merely talking to people in the area. The officers remained in their vehicle with their weapons holstered while questioning Mr. West. The officers asked to see Mr. West’s identification. Only when Mr. West reached into the duffel bag to retrieve his identification did Officer Nicks exit the vehicle to stand some distance away on the sidewalk.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.