Officers encountered defendant\u2019s 11 year old son when they arrived to do a knock-and-talk. They asked for defendant and he said that defendant was inside, and he took them in. Defendant\u2019s son is not treated as consenting to the entry, but defendant never objected to the officers being in the house either. When defendant was asked for consent, he refused, and the officers obtained a valid search warrant. United States v. Belt, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178891 (N.D. W.Va. December 20, 2013), R&R 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178888 (N.D. W.Va. November 8, 2013)*:<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The undersigned finds it an important distinction that Defendant’s son in this case was not consenting to a search. He simply invited or let the officers in the house, where his father was. Defendant could simply have told the officers to leave. The officers did not detain Defendant when they entered, and there is no evidence they saw anything in plain view due to their entry into the house. There is no evidence or argument that Defendant’s speaking with the officers was involuntary or coerced. This is further evidenced by the officers actually asking Defendant for his consent to search, which he refused, and the one officer then leaving to seek a search warrant.<\/p>\n
Based on the above, the undersigned finds Defendant’s son’s consent for the officers to simply enter the home where his father was did not invalidate the later search warrant.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading