Actual authority to consent and apparent authority in a motel room are two different things. Here, the government can\u2019t show either on this record. The possibility of a gun in the room is not an exigent circumstance. United States v. Gooch, 6 F.3d 673, 680 (9th Cir. 1993). United States v. Rivera, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19216 (D.Nev. Feb. 10, 2017).<\/p>\n
The inventory of defendant\u2019s car was valid. The officer had previously arrested defendant for driving on a suspended license, and then saw him again. This time defendant gave a false name, too, so defendant was arrested. The car was parked on somebody else\u2019s property he had no connection to, so the impounding of the car was reasonable as was the inventory. Cobb v. Commonwealth<\/a>, 2017 Ky. LEXIS 6 (Feb. 16, 2017).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Actual authority to consent and apparent authority in a motel room are two different things. Here, the government can\u2019t show either on this record. The possibility of a gun in the room is not an exigent circumstance. United States v. … Continue reading