CA8: Nighttime knock-and-talk is inherently more coercive

The district court’s decision suppressing a nighttime knock-and-talk of a hotel room was bolstered by the officers’ falsely identifying themselves as hotel security and the occupants being scared by what the officers were saying. A nighttime knock-and-talk is inherently more coercive. Defendants were asleep when rousted. United States v. Quintero, 648 F.3d 660 (8th Cir. 2011).

Just because defendant was a person of interest in a narcotics investigation, officers did not have reasonable suspicion to stop him. He was seized and not free to leave when the officer took his ID back to the patrol car to call it in, because he certainly was not free to take it back and leave. The officer asked him whether he had anything, and defendant admitted he had drugs. The admission led to a search which was suppressed because the stop was invalid. United States v. Blount, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86580 (E.D. Tenn. August 5, 2011).*

Defendant was found to have knowingly consented to a search of his vehicle eight minutes into his traffic stop. “You don’t mind if I take a look, do you?” was not a command. Tucker v. State, 2010 Tex. App. LEXIS 5922 (Tex. App.—San Antonio July 28, 2010), Released for Publication February 23, 2011.Petition for discretionary review granted by In re Tucker, 2011 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 172 (Tex. Crim. App., Feb. 2, 2011).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.