\u201cIt light of Kellerman\u2019s \u2018words and gestures,\u2019 the officers reasonably believed that Kellerman had consented to their entry into the basement. See Almeida-Perez, 549 F.3d at 1171 (\u2018Our circuit precedent … has been more liberal about allowing police to form their impressions from context.\u2019).\u201d United States v. Derden, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74684 (D. Minn. April 16, 2012), adopted 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74218 (D. Minn. May 30, 2012).*<\/p>\n
Defendant consented to the entry of her home by the police: \u201cNo, no, come in and look. No one is home.\u201d She was arrested for resisting. United States v. Hernandez, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74499 (W.D. N.C. April 16, 2012).*<\/p>\n
A pre-Gant<\/a> search in reliance on it was not subject to the exclusionary rule under Davis<\/a>. Hinkle v. State, 86 So. 3d 441 (Ala. Crim. App. 2011).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading