{"id":9380,"date":"2013-10-25T07:37:32","date_gmt":"2013-09-02T09:38:24","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2013-09-02T09:38:24","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=9380","title":{"rendered":"MD: Extreme and exploitive ruse to get consent to enter requires suppression"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Officers came to defendant\u2019s house after a cell phone stolen the day before was indicating it was in the house. They used the ruse they were looking for a pedophile to get into the house. The court finds the ruse to be extreme and exploitive and suppresses the entry. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.mdcourts.gov\/opinions\/cosa\/2013\/2281s10.pdf\">Redmond v. State<\/a>, 213 Md. App. 163, 73 A.3d 385 (2013):<\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>In the case at bar, we conclude that, as in Monte-Reyes, the police misrepresentation of purpose was extreme. Public outrage over the sexual abuse of children is widespread. The ruse concocted by the police was designed to exploit that outrage. As observed, the occupants of 3303 Round Road were led to believe that neither they nor anyone in their household was under suspicion but that the police needed their help to locate a dangerous pedophile. The ruse was detailed to give it validity, with the name and a photograph of the fictitious pedophile being given to Smith and Jones to make the (false) purpose of the police entry and presence in their home credible. Jones allowed police to remain in the house for that purpose. We are persuaded by the reasoning of the Monte-Reyes court that consent given under these extreme circumstances is not freely made. It is based on intentionally false information that is likely to result in the recipient&#8217;s allowing entry so the police can fulfill a dire public safety purpose the recipient has been misled into thinking the police have, when they do not. See Krause, supra, 206 S.W.3d at 925 (explaining that the police were &#8220;only able to reach a location [where they could observe illegal contraband in plain view] through machination&#8221;).<\/p>\n<p>Even if the consent given by Smith to enter the house were voluntary, we nevertheless would reverse the denial of the motion to suppress on the ground that the police exceeded the scope of the consent that was given. &#8220;The standard for measuring the scope of a [person]&#8217;s consent under the Fourth Amendment is that of &#8216;objective&#8217; reasonableness &#8212; what would the typical reasonable person have understood by the exchange between the officer and [the person giving consent]?&#8221; Florida v. Jimeno, 500 U.S. 248, 251, 111 S. Ct. 1801, 114 L. Ed. 2d 297 (1991). The objective reasonableness determination is a question of law, but &#8220;factual circumstances are highly relevant when determining what the reasonable person would have believed to be the outer bounds of the consent that was given.&#8221; United States v. Mendoza-Gonzalez, 318 F.3d 663, 667 (5th Cir. 2003).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=9380\">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-9380","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9380","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=9380"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9380\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=9380"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=9380"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=9380"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}