CA11: Alleged illegal search and indictment before statement can’t suppress statement

Defendant claimed an illegal search caused his statement, but he’d been indicted by this time, and he couldn’t show that it coerced his statement. United States v. Powner, 481 Fed. Appx. 529 (11th Cir. 2012)*:

Similarly, Powner’s assertion that when the police questioned him after his arrest on September 28, 2009, they “had at their disposal all of the illegally seized evidence,” falls short of demonstrating that the police actually used that tainted evidence to coerce Powner’s post-arrest statements. Therefore, we decline to hold that Ceccolini bars the admission of either Powner’s statements or the trial testimony of his co-defendants.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.