Defendant came to the police department to talk about a crime, and he refused consent. When officers said they could get a search warrant, he then consented, and that was not coerced. United States v. Hedrick, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36615 (E.D. Mo. March 7, 2011)*:<\/p>\n
That the law enforcement officers stated that they could arrest him for his involvement and obtain a search warrant for his house does not render his statements or consent involuntary. See United States v. Bradley<\/a>, 234 F.3d 363, 366-67 (8th Cir. 2000) (that officers threatened to arrest suspect\u2019s son did not render consent to search involuntary because although \u201cconcern for his son may have been a motivating factor,\u201d he had not \u201cacted under duress or undue pressure\u201d); United States v. Severe<\/a>, 29 F.3d 444, 446 (8th Cir. 1994) (that officers told defendant that if he refused to consent to the search, the officers would obtain a search warrant was \u201conly one factor in the totality of the circumstances inquiry\u201d).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
The affidavit for the search warrant had information a year old, but it was not stale considering the operation under investigation was ongoing. Even so, the GFE would save the search warrant. United States v. Estrada, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142511 (N.D. Ga. July 30, 2010).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading