CA9: Passenger parolee’s area of car was subject to search under his waiver

Defendant parolee was a passenger in a car, and the area of the car he was sitting in was subject to search. United States v. Pullen, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 13604 (9th Cir. June 5, 2024).

“The blood draw was not an unreasonable search because the Appellant voluntarily consented. The circumstances of the encounter weigh in favor of the voluntariness of the consent. The encounter occurred at approximately midnight in the back of an ambulance. Only one officer, Trooper Burrell, was present. Though Trooper Burrell initiated contact with the Appellant, there was no apparent hostility and no weapons displayed. Trooper Burrell requested consent for the blood draw, which the Appellant immediately provided. Regardless of whether Trooper Burrell explained the waiver form before or after the blood draw, ‘knowledge of a right to refuse is not a prerequisite of a voluntary consent.’ Schneckloth, 412 U.S. at 234.” State v. Barr, 2024 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 234 (June 5, 2024).*

Defendant’s Fourth Amendment ineffective assistance of counsel claim fails on the merits of the search. United States v. Edwards, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99271 (D. Mont. June 4, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Consent, Drug or alcohol testing, Ineffective assistance, Probation / Parole search. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.