An IRS agent is not required to tell a taxpayer when asking for consent that a criminal investigation may ensue. United States v. Dilworth, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142941 (D. N.J. December 12, 2011):<\/p>\n
\u201cA consent search is unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment if the consent was induced by the deceit, trickery or misrepresentation of the Internal Revenue Agent.\u201d United States v. Tweel<\/a>, 550 F.2d 297, 299 (5th Cir. 1977). However, \u201cthe mere failure of a revenue agent (be he regular or special) to warn the taxpayer that the investigation may result in criminal charges, absent any acts by the agent which materially misrepresent the nature of the inquiry, do not constitute fraud, deceit and trickery.\u201d Id. Importantly, \u201cthe record must disclose some affirmative misrepresentation to establish the existence of fraud, and the showing must be clear and convincing.\u201d Id.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\u201cShuffling, scuffling sound inside the trailer\u201d when police knocked was exigent circumstance for entry to prevent desctruction of evidence. United States v. Aguirre<\/a>, 664 F.3d 606 (5th Cir. 2011).<\/p>\n
Defendant was stopped in the area of a recent burglary because he matched the description given by the victims and was near the place. His stop and patdown were with reasonable suspicion. State v. McCormack<\/a>, 132 Conn. App. 490, 33 A.3d 264 (2011).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading