D.Haw.: Alleged illegal search by “marshals of the Kingdom of Atooi” wasn’t acquiesced in by federal or state officials

A crate of marijuana was searched by “marshals of the Kingdom of Atooi,” a Polynesian kingdom within Hawai’i not otherwise described. Their search was not at insistence or with the acquiescence of the state or federal government, and it could be used in federal court. United States v. Toyofuku, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126053 (D.Haw. September 21, 2015), same result on reconsideration, United States v. Toyofuku, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 167846 (D. Haw. Dec. 5, 2016).

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not calling one witness at the suppression hearing because it didn’t change the outcome on defendant’s lack of standing or the alternative ground of consent to enter and then plain view. United States v. Pantle, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125803 (N.D.Fla. August 11, 2015), adopted 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125804 (N.D. Fla. September 21, 2015).*

“Defendant’s motions to suppress evidence … [are recommended] DENIED because: (1) Corporal McFarland had probable cause to stop Cervi’s vehicle; (2) the facts surrounding this case reveal that Cervi was not detained in a way analogous to arrest and Corporal McFarland’s inquiry into whether Cervi had drugs in the vehicle did not necessitate Miranda warnings; (3) Corporal McFarland had reasonable suspicion to extend Cervi’s traffic stop; and (4) the preponderance of the evidence supports that Cervi gave valid and voluntary oral consent for Corporal McFarland to search his vehicle. Even if the Defendant did not consent to the search of his vehicle, the inevitable discovery rule would nevertheless apply.” United States v. Cervi, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125631 (N.D.W.Va. July 29, 2015),* adopted 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126905 (N.D.W.Va. September 21, 2015).*

This entry was posted in Automobile exception, Ineffective assistance, Private search. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.