CA1: Police lie about exigency vitiated consent; and there was no qualified immunity

A police lie that conveyed the need to defendant for urgent action to address a pressing threat to person or property vitiated any voluntary consent. Moreover, the officer doesn’t get qualified immunity. Págan-González v. Moreno, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 8716 (1st Cir. Mar. 22, 2019). Introductory paragraph:

This case requires us to consider the constitutional boundaries for the use of deception by law enforcement officers seeking consent for a warrantless search. We conclude that the search at issue here violated the Fourth Amendment because the circumstances — including a lie that conveyed the need for urgent action to address a pressing threat to person or property — vitiated the consent given by appellants. We further hold that the defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity from civil liability for the unlawful search because any reasonable officer would have recognized that the circumstances were impermissibly coercive.

This entry was posted in Consent, Qualified immunity. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.