{"id":5261,"date":"2011-08-08T08:11:27","date_gmt":"2011-03-09T00:20:52","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2011-03-08T21:01:18","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=5261","title":{"rendered":"CA4: Consent to search house for CP seven hours after illegal entry into curtilage purged taint"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Entry into defendant\u2019s backyard by the consent of the landlord was ineffective because a landlord cannot consent to a search of the renter\u2019s property, including the curtilage. Here, however, we also have a consent to search inside the house for child pornography seven hours later which purged the taint of the illegal search of the backyard. <a href=\"http:\/\/pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov\/opinion.pdf\/104670.U.pdf\">United States v. Howe<\/a>, 414 Fed. Appx. 579 (4th Cir. 2011) (unpublished):<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>First, a considerable period of time \u2014 more than seven hours \u2014 elapsed between Healy\u2019s entry onto the curtilage and the seizure of evidence related to child pornography. There was also a significant period of time between Healy\u2019s entry and his request for consent to search. Further, Howe\u2019s voluntary consent to the search of his home was an intervening act of free will. See [<a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=8826656230568767300&amp;q=brown+v.+illinois&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,33\">Brown v. Illinois<\/a>,] at 549 &amp; n.10 (holding, albeit in dicta, that consent to further police interaction is sufficient to \u201csever the connection between an unlawful act and the acquisition of additional evidence\u201d). Finally, Healy\u2019s warrantless entrance onto the curtilage of Howe\u2019s property, while unlawful, was neither flagrant nor offensive. Id. at 550. Accordingly, we affirm the district court\u2019s denial of the motion to suppress, although on modified grounds.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Officers responding to a noise complaint at defendant\u2019s trailer ended up inside. They knew that defendant was a convicted felon, so seeing a gun in the premises made it \u201cimmediately apparent\u201d that the gun was evidence of a crime for plain view purposes. United States v. Burch, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141795 (S.D. Ga. July 6, 2010).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=5261\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5261","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5261","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=5261"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5261\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=5261"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=5261"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=5261"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}