M.D.Fla.: 4A doesn’t apply to foreign citizens in their own country, even if U.S. arranges the arrest

“Cifuentes-Cuero also argues that the manner in which the United States government brought him into this country, by using ‘falsification [and] unconscionable action[s]’ violated his due process rights and divested the Court of jurisdiction. (Doc. # 1-1 at 14-19). Cifuentes-Cuero has produced not a scrap of evidence to support this theory, but even if he had, ‘[t]he manner in which [Cifuentes-Cuero] was brought to trial, however, does not affect the ability of the government to try him.’ United States v. Mitchell, 957 F.2d 465, 470 (7th Cir. 1992) (citing Ker-Frisbie doctrine).” In addition, the Fourth Amendment doesn’t apply to a foreign citizen arrested in his own country. Cifuentes-Cuero v. United States, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 229755 (M.D.Fla. Dec. 1, 2021).

“However, Fridell fails to explain how the police engaged in or threatened to engage in conduct that violated the Fourth Amendment. The superior court found, and Fridell does not dispute, that the police had probable cause to arrest Fridell outside of his hotel room and that Fridell was, in fact, outside of his hotel room when the police made initial contact. Under these circumstances, the exigency was not created by police engaging in or threatening to engage in conduct that violated the Fourth Amendment. Rather, the exigency was created by Fridell fleeing a lawful arrest. The superior court therefore did not err in denying Fridell’s motion to suppress the drugs and drug paraphernalia.” Fridell v. State, 2021 Alas. App. LEXIS 168 (Dec. 1, 2021).*