{"id":6038,"date":"2012-10-02T14:28:11","date_gmt":"2011-09-19T12:29:14","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2011-09-19T12:29:14","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=6038","title":{"rendered":"VT adopts independent appellate review of consent following <em>Ornelas<\/em>"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>VT adopts independent appellate review of consent following <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=4602315307837060731&amp;q=Ornelas&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,44\">Ornelas<\/a>. <a href=\"http:\/\/info.libraries.vermont.gov\/supct\/current\/op2010-040.html\">State v. Weisler<\/a>, 2011 VT 96, 190 Vt. 344, 35 A.3d 970 (2011):<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>[*P26]  At the same time, as the Supreme Court stressed in <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=4602315307837060731&amp;q=Ornelas&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,44\">Ornelas<\/a>, the \u201cmulti-faceted\u201d nature of the voluntariness inquiry underscores the need for a body of binding case-law applying the consent-standard in a variety of individual cases, thereby providing \u201ccontent &#8230; through application\u201d and guidance to the police and the trial courts. 517 U.S. at 697; see also <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=2129138529315074091&amp;q=Ornelas&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,44\">Miller<\/a>, 474 U.S. at 114 (citing the imperative for independent review where \u201cthe relevant legal principle can be given meaning only through its application to the particular circumstances of a case\u201d). Finally, we recognize that the voluntariness-of-consent issue implicates a \u201ccomplex of values,\u201d Miller, 474 U.S. at 116 (quotation omitted); it requires a balancing of the need for effective law enforcement against the imperative to restrain unfair police tactics and maintain individual dignity\u2014a declaration of constitutional norms and values that demands statewide force and application. These are functions that only a reviewing court with broad jurisdiction and authority can perform. Accordingly, we hold that a trial court&#8217;s decision on the question of the voluntariness of a consent to search, and thus the ultimate constitutional validity of the search, must be reviewed independently by this Court on appeal.<\/p>\n<p>. . .<\/p>\n<p>[*P34]  Ultimately, it is not the purported distinctions from <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=4602315307837060731&amp;q=Ornelas&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,44\">Ornelas<\/a>, <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=8342275882362691410&amp;q=Ornelas&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,44\">Thompson<\/a>, and <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=2129138529315074091&amp;q=Ornelas&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,44\">Miller<\/a> that appear to drive the dissent but rather a fundamental disagreement with their holdings, a disagreement grounded on a suspicion that de novo review somehow represents a \u201cnegative assessment of the quality of fact-finding by trial courts with respect to federal constitutional questions.\u201d Post, \u00b6 76. This inference is unfounded and can not be reached by anything stated or implied in the majority opinion. Like the U.S. Supreme Court, we continue to accord  substantial deference to the trial court&#8217;s findings of historical fact. Nothing in our opinion can or should be construed to undermine this fundamental principle of appellate review.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=6038\">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-6038","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6038","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=6038"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6038\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=6038"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=6038"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=6038"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}