D.Minn.: Statement made during raid of home was not voluntary

When the police raid your house and handcuff you, a statement made when handcuffed and police in the house is inherently coercive. There was third party consent to his files in his company’s server. United States v. Williams, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74547 (D.Minn. May 28, 2013), R&R 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75938 (D. Minn. March 27, 2013):

In the instant case, Williams’s statements and consent were involuntary due to the surrounding circumstances. Given the force demonstrated to enter his home, that the officers were visibly armed, and the fact that their presence was based on a search warrant, the interrogation was custodial, inherently coercive, and sufficient to cause Williams’s will to be overborne. Dickerson, 530 U.S. at 434. The same facts establish that Williams’s consent to a search of his vehicle was involuntary. 10 Unlike many cases finding consent to search voluntary, Williams did not invite the officers into his home and could not ask them to leave. See United States v. Downwind, No. 11-cr-295 (MJD/LIB), 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150963, 2011 WL 6963611, at *7 (D. Minn. Oct. 25, 2011) (finding consent to search home voluntary because Downwind “gave clear consent for police to enter the home”). The law enforcement officers were executing a legal search warrant; Williams did not invite them into his home and could not require them to leave. Under these circumstances, Williams’s statements and consent were not voluntary.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.