{"id":9786,"date":"2014-02-25T06:40:56","date_gmt":"2013-11-14T08:39:48","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2013-11-14T08:39:48","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=9786","title":{"rendered":"WI: GFE saves search in Mexico even if it was illegal because Mexican officers represented it would be valid"},"content":{"rendered":"

A search in Mexico was authorized by defendant\u2019s landlord, which Mexican officers believed was valid and represented it to be valid. It\u2019s not clear it was valid, but, assuming the search was invalid, the good faith exception still applies. State v. Johnson<\/a>, 2013 WI App 140, 352 Wis. 2d 98, 841 N.W.2d 302 (2013):<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\u00b69 Johnson asserts that the circuit court erred when it found that landlord consent is a valid exception to Mexican law requiring a warrant to search a residence. The State apparently concedes that the record does not support a finding that Mexican law includes an exception for landlord consent. Accordingly, we assume that the search was not legal under Mexican law and turn to an analysis of whether the fruits of the illegal search were properly admitted.<\/p>\n

Good Faith Exception to the Exclusionary Rule<\/em><\/p>\n

\u00b610 Wisconsin has followed the lead of the United States Supreme Court in adopting a good faith exception to the exclusionary rule, State v. Eason, 2001 WI 98, \u00b664, 245 Wis. 2d 206, 629 N.W.2d 625, stemming from the belief that evidence should be admissible when it is “obtained in the reasonable good-faith belief that a search or seizure was in accord with the Fourth Amendment.” United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 909 (1984) (citation omitted). Our courts have applied the exception for an unlawful search carried out in reliance on a facially valid search warrant, Eason, 245 Wis. 2d 206, \u00b673, or on clear and settled precedent, Dearborn, 327 Wis. 2d 252, \u00b646. Johnson does not argue that the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule should not be extended to cases involving reliance on foreign authorities conducting foreign searches. We agree that the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule is appropriate in this context.<\/p>\n

\u00b611 Employment of the good faith exception in this case is in accord with our supreme court’s instruction that application of the exclusionary rule should be restricted to cases where the rule’s remedial objectives will be best served, focusing on the efficacy in deterring future Fourth Amendment violations.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Id., \u00b635. The threat of suppression of evidence by a United States court is unlikely to have any effect on the legal opinions provided by Mexican authorities to United States law enforcement officials or how Mexican authorities conduct a search on their soil. More importantly, it would not alter the behavior of United States law enforcement officials who have relied on the assurances of foreign authorities that a search is legal. See Leon, 468 U.S. at 916. Holding American law enforcement officials “to a strict liability standard for failings of their foreign associates would be even more incongruous than holding law enforcement officials to a strict liability standard as to the adequacy of domestic warrants.” Peterson, 812 F.2d at 492.<\/p>\n

\u00b612 In applying the good faith exception to this case, we must decide whether United States law enforcement officials involved in the search of Johnson’s Mexican residence “acted in the objectively reasonable belief that their conduct did not violate the Fourth Amendment.” Dearborn, 327 Wis. 2d 252, \u00b633 (citation omitted). It is clear that they did so. It was objectively reasonable for American law enforcement to believe in the legality of a joint Mexican-American search under the control of Mexican law enforcement that was carried out based on contact between the FBI liaison to Mexico and his counterpart in Mexico who contacted the head law enforcement officer in Baja California who advised as to how a warrantless search could occur.<\/p>\n

\u00b613 Johnson argues that United States law enforcement officers should have conducted a separate inquiry into Mexican law to confirm the information received from the Baja California attorney general. Such an argument is without merit as we presume high-ranking Mexican law enforcement personnel know their own laws. As United States law enforcement authorities were objectively reasonable in relying on the assurances of Mexican authorities that the search of Johnson’s residence was legal under Mexican law, the circuit court’s denial of Johnson’s motion to suppress evidence was proper.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Really shortens the choice of law consideration, doesn’t it? See \u00a7 9.03 of the Treatise<\/a>. <\/p>\n

Consider also the self-validation of the search: “Of course it’s legal. We do this all the time.” <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading →<\/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-9786","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9786","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=9786"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9786\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=9786"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=9786"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=9786"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}