N.D.Ill.: Alleged violation of police dept policy on consent didn’t affect 4A claim here

The defense claim the officer somehow violated department policy in obtaining consent doesn’t bear on the constitutional question at all. There was at least reasonable suspicion for his stop and the encounter. United States v. Lopez-Garcia, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88505 (N.D.Ill. May 17, 2022).

Officers had probable cause for defendant’s arrest for a sex trafficking crime for a meeting with a minor for sex during a biker rally. The search incident of his vehicle was reasonable. “Here, officers reasonably believed the car contained evidence of attempted commercial sex trafficking of a minor and attempted enticement of a minor for sexual activity. Slim agreed to bring a condom for the meeting, to pay $200, and used a phone to plan his meeting with Russell. It was reasonable for officers to believe they would find this evidence in the car.” [For what it’s worth, the description also supports the automobile exception.] United States v. Slim, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 13199 (8th Cir. May 17, 2022).*

The suppression hearing didn’t address a Franks claim. “But this hearing did not address any alleged omission in the search warrant affidavit. It addressed only whether the Algorithm was reliable enough to establish probable cause.” Therefore, plain error applies on appeal. United States v. Weyerman, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 13244 (3d Cir. May 17, 2022).*

This entry was posted in Consent, Staleness, Voluntariness, Waiver. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.