CA7: Conduct clearly showed consent to enter after 911 hangup call

911 hangup call led police to defendant’s house and talking to his girlfriend who consented to the entry by the police. United States v. Risner, 593 F.3d 692 (7th Cir. 2010)*:

We agree with the district court that Dean impliedly consented to the police entering her home on both occasions. Regarding the first entry, Dean called the police. Although she hung up before speaking with the dispatcher, she willingly spoke with Dulin when he arrived on the scene. She told him that she had called 911 because Risner had attacked her and threatened her life. She also told him that Risner was armed and where he was hiding in the house. Any reasonable person would infer from Dean’s communications that she consented to the police entry into her home to arrest Risner. In fact, we have trouble imagining why Dean would have provided Dulin such information if she was not actually requesting that the police enter her home and arrest Risner.

Officers stopped defendant based on calls that he had been threatening others with a gun. When stopped, they saw a gun. That was probable cause for a search. United States v. Sir, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8743 (W.D. Tenn. February 2, 2010)*, USMJ’s R&R United States v. Sir, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124473 (W.D. Tenn. December 22, 2009).*

Before an arrest warrant issued for a dirty UA, the officer does not first have to establish that the test was not flawed. United States v. Truette, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 112209 (N.D. Fla. June 6, 2008).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.