W.D.N.Y.: No REP in police interview room

There was no reasonable expectation of privacy in a police interview room. The defendants were not misled, and their actions and hushed tones in the room showed they knew they could be overheard. United States v. Cook, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 245891 (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 27, 2021):

But there is no evidence of such deception here. Although the record is silent about whether the cameras and microphones were visible, see Docket Item 77 at 20, there is no reason to believe that the defendants were misled in any way. For example, the defendants were never told that their conversation would not be monitored, nor does the video show any deception by law enforcement. See id. at 25. In fact, other than by noting that the police shut the door to the room and did not affirmatively warn the defendants that their conversation might be recorded, the defendants point to nothing suggesting any deception.

And the defendants’ conduct in the room suggests just the opposite—that they well knew that their conversation might be monitored. As Judge McCarthy noted, they spoke “in a hushed tone, with at least one attempted hand signal, demonstrating their awareness that the room was being monitored.” Id. at 26 (citation to video omitted). That corroborates the lack of police deception, and it undermines the subjective element necessary for the defendants to establish their reasonable expectation of privacy. United States v. Shelton, 2015 WL 500886, at *8 (W.D.N.Y. 2015).