The fact defendant didn\u2019t read the consent form doesn\u2019t make it involuntary. Not reading it was defendant\u2019s choice. \u201cThis leaves the agents’ purported threat to \u2018tear the apartment apart\u2019 if they obtained a warrant \u2014 something the Government contends never happened. Such a statement does not in and of itself render her consent involuntary. Courts must evaluate threatening statements in the broader context in which they were made, considering how the words would reasonably be interpreted.\u201d United States v. Mirilishvili, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 136424 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 1, 2015).<\/p>\n
The dashcam video shows that the driver consented to the search of the rented vehicle. This defendant didn\u2019t have standing in the vehicle. United States v. Murillo-Salgado, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137448 (W.D.Mo. Oct. 8, 2015),* R&R 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137514 (W.D.Mo. Sept. 8, 2015).*<\/p>\n
Defendant filed a general motion to suppress which didn\u2019t allege what evidence was illegally obtained or how it was illegal. The search was with a warrant, and, based on the government\u2019s discovery, the warrant was with probable cause and phone records were obtained by subpoena. United States v. Ledbetter, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137643 (S.D.Ohio Oct. 8, 2015).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The fact defendant didn\u2019t read the consent form doesn\u2019t make it involuntary. Not reading it was defendant\u2019s choice. \u201cThis leaves the agents’ purported threat to \u2018tear the apartment apart\u2019 if they obtained a warrant \u2014 something the Government contends never … Continue reading