Defendant\u2019s consent was involuntary. He refused consent and the officers kept asked him three times to get him to agree. United States v. Clark, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126985 (D. V.I. July 30, 2019).<\/p>\n
Defendant on the totality consented to the search of the premises. \u201cHere, although the Ringgold apartment was not Defendant’s primary residence, he was a frequent overnight guest, he had his own key to the apartment, he kept his clothes there, and he had permission to come and go at his leisure. (Doc. 24 at 7). Under the circumstances, the Court finds that Defendant has standing to contest the search.\u201d United States v. Sanders, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127304 (S.D. Ohio July 31, 2019).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Defendant\u2019s consent was involuntary. He refused consent and the officers kept asked him three times to get him to agree. United States v. Clark, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126985 (D. V.I. July 30, 2019). Defendant on the totality consented to … Continue reading