N.D.Ga.: While the question is close, consent was voluntary on the totality; it was asked for, not coerced

Officers were in the house and finally asked for permission to search. While the question is close, the court finds consent was voluntary on the totality. United States v. Avellaneda-Dimas, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 161865 (N.D. Ga. July 24, 2018),* adopted, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 161594 (N.D. Ga. Sep. 21, 2018)*:

Nevertheless, while the question is closer, the Court still finds that the totality of facts supports the conclusion that both Defendants voluntarily consented to the search of their respective rooms. While not free to leave, the Defendants were not restrained in any way either, had not been arrested, had not been physically or verbally threatened or even substantially touched, had not been subjected to any lengthy detention or questioning, and the officers made no improper or misleading assurances or promises. That this discussion occurred in the familiar surroundings of the Defendants’ own home also weighs in favor of voluntariness. The unrebutted testimony of the agents also shows that they calmly requested consent in the form of a question, and that the Defendants affirmatively verbally responded with words of asset or agreement such as “yes, we could search,” Tr. II at 37-38, or that they “did not mind” if the agents searched, Tr. at 14-15, 47. Again, asking a question, “do you mind if we” or “can we” search a room is not itself a claim of lawful authority, and affirmatively responding, “yes,” “I don’t mind,” or the like, suggests more than mere acquiescence to any such claim.

This entry was posted in Consent. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.