Consent to search while in custody and unMirandized was still voluntary

Consent to search signed while in custody but not yet Mirandized was voluntary according to the evidence. The totality standard always applies, and here it favors the findings of fact. United States v. Renken, 474 F.3d 984 (7th Cir. January 31, 2007).

Search under defendant’s pillow for a gun after he had locked himself in the bedroom and had threatened his girlfriend was with exigent circumstances. United States v. Uscanga-Ramirez, 475 F.3d 1024 (8th Cir. January 31, 2007):

Even if Lisa Olson had not consented to the officers’ warrantless entry into the home, exigent circumstances justified their warrantless entry into the home, entry into the bedroom and search under the pillow. Clearly, the officers were justified in entering the home and bedroom without a warrant. The officers had reliable information that Uscanga-Ramirez had locked himself in a bedroom with a gun and that he was very upset over the disintegration of his marriage. When the circumstances are viewed objectively, Brigham City, 126 S. Ct. at 1947, the officers were justified in entering the house and bedroom to make sure that Uscanga-Ramirez would not seriously injure or kill himself. See, e.g., id.; see also Janis, 387 F.3d at 687-88 (holding warrantless entry into home was justified, in part, because the officers needed “to secure [a] weapon so others would not be harmed”).

Opening a screen or storm door can be an entry, see here, but not when the inside door is closed and the officer opened it to knock after a knock on the storm door got no answer. United States v. Walker, 474 F.3d 1249 (10th Cir. January 31, 2007).*

Officer had a 911 report of a man with a gun and arrived at scene, and defendant raised his hands showing the silhouette of a gun, and that was corroboration. United States v. Lacy, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6470 (C.D. Ill. January 30, 2007)*:

Lacy, however, raised his arms and revealed the silhouette of a revolver in his front jeans pocket before Oglesby said anything. At this point, Oglesby had a reasonable suspicion that criminal activity was afoot. Carrying a concealed weapon is a crime in Illinois.

Statute of limitations for Fourth Amendment § 1983 claims in Texas is two years, and adding a defendant after the two years expired was time barred. Kopecki v. City of Corpus Christi, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6513 (S.D. Tex. January 30, 2007).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.