CA8: Consent still found although def had to be wrestled to be handcuffed because of gun involved

Defendant was a Greyhound passenger from LA to KC, and a dog got a whiff of his fanny pack and alerted. He admitted marijuana was in the bag. Then a gun, which led to a struggle when he wouldn’t keep his hands away from it. Then a search produced fentanyl. The search was still by consent. United States v. Rhodes, 24-2829 (8th Cir. Aug. 19, 2025)*:

Rhodes argues that officers placed him in a coercive environment by wrestling him to the ground, handcuffing him, taking him to a secluded room in the bus station, and soliciting consent without giving him warnings prescribed by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). The use of handcuffs and the placement of a suspect under arrest or in custody does not preclude a finding of consent where other circumstances suggest voluntariness. Magallon, 984 F.3d at 1281; United States v. Bearden, 780 F.3d 887, 895 (8th Cir. 2015). Context is also relevant: Rhodes should have understood that he was wrestled to the ground and handcuffed because he refused to surrender a bag that contained a gun, not because he was under pressure to consent. The district court did not clearly err in finding that the indicia of voluntariness outweighed factors that might have weighed against a finding of consent. The district court properly declined to suppress evidence seized as a result of the consensual search.

This entry was posted in Consent. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.