CA10: Def’s subjective belief of officers’ tribal authority irrelevant to objective facts of consent

Defendant was an American Indian, and he thought that the tribal governor had authorized the police to investigate his killing of eagles. His subjective belief as to the officers’ actions was not relevant to the Fourth Amendment inquiry as to what the officers believed from the objective facts. [So, boiled down to its essence: this is an example of a good faith warrantless search.] United States v. Aguilar, 527 Fed. Appx. 808 (10th Cir. 2013):

The Court concludes that if the voluntariness of Defendant’s consent is measured by an objective standard limited to … what the special agents knew or should have known about Defendant’s state of mind, Defendant’s subjective concern that he might be acting contrary to the Governor’s will if he declined to cooperate is irrelevant to the voluntariness inquiry due to the absence of evidence that the special agents knew or had reason to know of Defendant’s subjective state of mind. Alternatively, the Court concludes that if Defendant’s unexpressed subjective concern is part of the “totality of the circumstances,” it should not be given significant weight, United States v. Iribe, 11 F.3d 1553, 1557 (10th Cir. 1993), and that due to the absence of evidence of coercion or duress on the part of the special agents, Defendant’s subjective concern that a failure to cooperate with the special agents might be viewed as disrespect for the Governor is insufficient to render his consent involuntary.

Order Den. Mot. to Suppress Evid. at 19 (footnote omitted). Elsewhere in its order, the district court found that, if Aguilar believed the agents were acting at the direction of the Governor, he would have felt obliged to cooperate with them. The court also found, however, that at the time Aguilar agreed to meet with the agents at the Sam’s Club, he was “unsure whether the investigation by the USFWS had been instigated by the Governor or was being conducted with his approval.” Id. at 14 (emphasis added). The district court arrived at this finding by noting that, prior to the agents’ arrival, Aguilar had already spoken with the Governor about his having killed eagles on tribal land. From this, the court found it was possible Aguilar thought the Governor informed the USFWS about his killing of eagles, but that it was equally likely Aguilar considered the matter to have been resolved to the Governor’s satisfaction during their meeting.