D.Minn.: Def’s lawyering up prior to giving statement didn’t prevent her from being asked for consent

Defendant was Mirandized and lawyered up. The officer then asked for consent in writing and got it. Her lawyering up didn’t prevent her from being asked to consent, and it was voluntary on the totality. United States v. Unpradit, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116208 (D. Minn. July 12, 2018):

Here, under the totality of the circumstances, the Court concludes Unpradit’s consent to search was voluntary. While Unpradit was handcuffed and in custody in the back of a police vehicle, she felt free to invoke her Sixth Amendment right to consult with an attorney. After that, SA Nejfelt did not question Unpradit about the sex trafficking conspiracy. SA Nejfelt read Unpradit the consent to search form and believes she understood the form in its entirety. SA Nejfelt’s credible testimony indicated he received Unpradit’s consent to search. Indeed, on the consent to search form, SA Nejfelt wrote the passwords to the iPhones, indicating that Unpradit communicated this information to law enforcement. SA Nejfelt credibly testified that he never raised his voice; Unpradit was very cooperative; and no weapons were drawn throughout law enforcement’s entire encounter with Unpradit and Yun. SA Nejfelt further credibly testified that he did not lie to Unpradit, threaten her, or make any misrepresentations about what he wished to search. These facts lead the Court to conclude that, under the totality of the circumstances, Unpradit’s consent to search was voluntarily given.

This entry was posted in Consent. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.