TX4: Officers called to a domestic disturbance were let in but did not immediately leave when consent was revoked, but their staying there was not unreasonable

Officers were called to a domestic disturbance, and they heard yelling as they approached. Once inside, it was obvious there was a disturbance there, and the female caller was vague and acted like it was over, and she denied that he was there, which the officers believed was false. The officers did not leave right away and stuck around to “learn certain things first” until she finally revoked her consent for them to be inside for a second time. By then, an officer saw drugs in plain view which she tried to grab from him. The entry and remaining inside was valid. Miller v. State, 345 S.W.3d 616 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2011).*

Probation officers still had probable cause to believe that defendant’s residence was as he stated it. While there was conflicting information about his residence, he only saying that he was thinking about moving and somebody else saying that he didn’t live there, that person had lied to probation officers before about his residence. United States v. Romero, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34440 (D. Mont. March 30, 2011).*

There was no indication that defendant’s written consent was anything other than voluntary. Also, he was asked about the luggage carrier during the search, and he did not object at that time. United States v. $93,120.00 in United States Currency, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34664 (D. Neb. February 23, 2011).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.