{"id":678,"date":"2007-06-17T07:09:13","date_gmt":"2007-01-05T08:41:49","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2007-01-05T08:41:49","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=678","title":{"rendered":"Person who just left premises before search warrant was executed could be detained through the search under <em>Summers<\/em>"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Detention of a man who just left the premises to be searched was valid. Presence alone <em>just before<\/em> the warrant was executed is enough.  United States v. Castro-Portillo, 211 Fed. Appx. 715 (10th Cir. 2007) (unpublished):<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Applying <em>Summers<\/em> and <em>Muehler<\/em> to the case at hand, it is plain the search warrant in this case carried with it the limited authority to detain Mr. Castro-Portillo as an occupant during the search of the house. This alone was sufficient to detain him during the entirety of the search. The fact he was not observed committing a crime at the time of the stop, drove away from the house moments before the execution of the search warrant, and did not know about the search warrant did not prevent authorities from having the requisite suspicion to stop him, as further demonstrated by our decision in <em>Ritchie.<\/em> In that case, the defendant was stopped in his driveway and then detained in his yard ten minutes before execution of a search warrant on his residence. <em>See<\/em> 35 F.3d at 1479, 1483. <\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>(<em>Note:<\/em> The 10th Cir. says this is unpublished, but F.R.A.P. 32.1 applies to all cases decided after January 1st making it binding authority.)<\/p>\n<p>Record supported a finding of voluntariness of consent for a search and a <em>Miranda<\/em> waiver. Defendant was a Brazilian police officer, and Brazilian law recognized a right to remain silent as well, so he was aware of what was going on.  United States v. Braiani, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23 (D. Me. January 2, 2007).*<\/p>\n<p>Officers were standing by to keep the peace during a litter removal action on residential property, and they ended up arresting plaintiff for obstructing official business and resisting arrest. The arrest was with cause and summary judgment is granted for the defendants. Helms v. City of Green, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21 (N.D. Ohio January 2, 2007).*<\/p>\n<p><em>(In court today. More posting later.)<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=678\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-678","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/678","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=678"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/678\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=678"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=678"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=678"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}