OH7: Def didn’t impliedly consent to officer’s entry into hotel room when def was getting his ID

The officer encountered defendant in the hotel lobby. He asked for defendant’s ID, and defendant said he had to go to his room to get it. The officer asked if he could accompany him to the room. The officer’s entry into the room was not by consent. Defendant had a woman in the room with him, and he asked “are you decent?” and opened the door only wide enough for him to slide in. The bodycam video shows the officer pushing the door open. Once inside, he went through the woman’s purse. State v. Smith, 2023-Ohio-3587, 2023 Ohio App. LEXIS 3510 (7th Dist. Sep. 28, 2023).

“The Affidavit may not be the paragon of precision, but it does not require mental gymnastics to find a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime would be found at 118 Cotton Bayou Lane on February 28, 2023. Thus, the Affidavit is not bare bones, so the officers’ good-faith reliance upon Judge Caldwell’s probable cause determination was objectively reasonable, and the exclusionary rule does not apply to the evidence obtained pursuant to the Warrant.” United States v. Jackson, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 179732 (W.D. La. Sep. 20, 2023),* adopted, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178498 (W.D. La. Oct. 3, 2023).*

Defendant’s arrest was valid, as was the ensuing inventory since the vehicle was being towed. United States v. Fayton, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 179753 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 5, 2023).*