Supreme Court expands police authority in home searches

[StantonCree]

Exactly!

When the LEOs roll up to your residence, they do not know who the owner is. Once someone gives them premission, they are clear to continue the investigation inside.

Hmmmm......kids? Houseguests? Babysitters? The UPS man? A bum sleeping on the stoop?

Yes, anyone who opens the door, and invites them in.

That was my point.

WAKE UP AMERICA!!!

Not really. If the person has no residency then they can't consent to a search because its nt theirs. A vehicle is different because the driver is responsible for everything in the car but in a house that's not theirs.....nope.

We deal with this a lot actually. A mother can't consent to a search of her adult sons bedroom because he has a privacy expectation. Its hard to really explain because she can consent if she is the owner to the house (to include the sons bedroom......legally) but any evidence found in his bedroom will be thrown out at court. If you get a warrant for the premise its good evidence!

We use owner consent searches when we have no legal justification to get a SW. We know we can't charge the person but it gets evidence off the street.

Example: a month ago a woman called me saying she found a SKS mag and an AK drum mag inside her house. It wasn't put their by her family but a daughters friend. Based on what they said I didn't have enough evidence to get a SW on the guy who put it there so I went to his house and got his dad to allow me a consent search. We found a couple things.....that we legally couldn't charge the kid with because it was a consent. However with this kids. I violent background it was better that we removed them ASAP since he was also storing gun parts with a 7 yr old.

Long story and confusing but there is a gray area that allows for the consent search......but the evidence is usually no good. A SW is the best way to go.

A SW is not as easy to obtain (at least in DC) as some of you think. Sometimes it takes 3-4 days. Emergency SWs aren't easy either and usually take 8 hours thanks to attorneys and on call judges.

Lastly anyone with legal competency (functioning adult) that has residence should be allowed to consent to their property. A roommate can't consent to your room....but a wife can.

 

[safecracker]

Thanks for the clarification, still murky but at least give consensual search some parameters. The 'after the fact' headaches and expenses are what would concern me if such a search were deemed illegal and my property had been seized.

 

[whistlersmother]

We use owner consent searches when we have no legal justification to get a SW. We know we can't charge the person but it gets evidence off the street.

Winner, winner, chicken dinner.

Consent search turns up unregistered handguns - handguns imported into Maryland with C&R license. I don't think MSP will allow those to stay in the house while they check out the FFL03's story. Might as well take all the other guns and ammo also to verify occupant purchased them legally.

How long and how much expense to get evidence back to the owner when its is legal but held after a consent search pending investigation?

Confiscation completed.

 

[clandestine]

Search Warrants have limits. Consent to search DOES NOT, you cant say, oh yeah, search my stuff but don't go into THAT bedroom.

 

[StantonCree]

Ill post a great example shortly and the case is done so you guys can pick it apart all u want

 

[daNattyFatty]

Search Warrants have limits. Consent to search DOES NOT, you cant say, oh yeah, search my stuff but don't go into THAT bedroom.

I'm going to disagree with you on this one. Consent (whether it's a residence or vehicle) can be revoked at any time. Now, if contraband is found prior to the revocation, a search warrant can easily be obtained.

Search warrants do have limits, but they're limited to possible areas where the contraband enumerated in the warrant could be secreted. For instance, if a knife is being searched for, that could be secreted just about anywhere. However, if you're looking for a 42" flat screen TV, you can't go looking for it in a dresser drawer.

 

[clandestine]

I'm going to disagree with you on this one. Consent (whether it's a residence or vehicle) can be revoked at any time. Now, if contraband is found prior to the revocation, a search warrant can easily be obtained.

Search warrants do have limits, but they're limited to possible areas where the contraband enumerated in the warrant could be secreted. For instance, if a knife is being searched for, that could be secreted just about anywhere. However, if you're looking for a 42" flat screen TV, you can't go looking for it in a dresser drawer.

I didn't say revoked for a consent search, I said limiting a consent search. There is a marked difference. I know that search warrants have limits, I said that.

Revoked means stopping a consent search, trying to impose restrictions on a consent search up front wont work. If you disagree please feel free to try it.

Stopping a consent search in progress will likely give a LEO enough to request a search warrant. If that happens they will likely remove you from your property until its granted to prevent destruction of evidence.

 

[clandestine]

Ill post a great example shortly and the case is done so you guys can pick it apart all u want

They wont hear it.

 

[daNattyFatty]

I didn't say revoked for a consent search, I said limiting a consent search. There is a marked difference. I know that search warrants have limits, I said that.

Revoked means stopping a consent search, trying to impose restrictions on a consent search up front wont work. If you disagree please feel free to try it.

Stopping a consent search in progress will likely give a LEO enough to request a search warrant. If that happens they will likely remove you from your property until its granted to prevent destruction of evidence.

My mistake, I thought you were going a different direction. You're right, exceptions can't be carved out when consent is given.

Though stopping a consent search doesn't guarantee that a search warrant will be issued. A judge will still want PC to support the warrant and if there is none leading up to the revocation, then it's too bad for the LEO.

 

[clandestine]

My mistake, I thought you were going a different direction. You're right, exceptions can't be carved out when consent is given.

Though stopping a consent search doesn't guarantee that a search warrant will be issued. A judge will still want PC to support the warrant and if there is none leading up to the revocation, then it's too bad for the LEO.

Sounds like we misunderstood each other.

I agree completely.

What I don't get is why this is so hard for people to grasp, it does not take a Lawyer to understand these things.

 

[BradMacc82]

What I don't get is why this is so hard for people to grasp, it does not take a Lawyer to understand these things.

Because tinfoil not only blocks spy satellites, but rational thoughts as well??

 

[plinkerton]

Exactly!

When the LEOs roll up to your residence, they do not know who the owner is. Once someone gives them premission, they are clear to continue the investigation inside.

What expansion? Consent to search is exactly that.

They had already been told "no" by him, no is no. If they had enough evidence for a warrant they would have gotten a warrant.
They knocked, probably used some intimidation, and then searched.
End run around the 4th. I almost puke agreeing with Ginsberg ....

 

[StantonCree]

Ill post a great example shortly and the case is done so you guys can pick it apart all u want

2 years ago we get a call for a man with a gun at a specific address. We end up meeting 3 women who stated that a male 9then gave a look-out) had asked to pay them for sex. They declined and he got more agressive. They stated that they were not hookers and began to make fun of him and his attempts. He pulled out a gun and stated he was going to kill them. The females got loud and agressive and the man ran inside an apartment building. We surrounded the building and he ended up coming outside. I placed him in cuffs and asked him where the gun is. He stated there was no gun. I asked him for consent to search the apartment and he gave me verbal consent......witnessed by 3 other officers and a Sgt.

Inside the apartment was 2 bedrooms. One was locked and one was open. The open bedroom he stated was his. I searched the open bedroom and was able to find mail matter confirming it was his room. The common areas of the house were searched (kitchen, living room, bathroom, laundry area) as well as the backyard.

We asked him about the locked room and he stated it was his roommates room and that he almost never went in there.

NOW here is where it gets tricky. Legally he gave consent to the entire premise and we had 100% legal justification to go inside the locked room BUT anything of evidenciary value would be thrown out at court because we currently did not have consent to search that room from the roommate and if we found 30 keys of coke it would be thrown out.

My options at the time were get the roommate their and get consent or draw up an emergency SW.

We ended up getting the roommate back to the address and he gave consent. Inside his room was a BB Gun that was identical to the weapon described by the victims (who believed it was a real gun).

He was charged with like 3 crimes (plus he had 3 pending open cases) and after everything was said and done D.C. Sentenced him and ICE got involved. I don't know if he was deported or not, not that, that matters.

The point being here is due to his consent I had every legal right to search that room but because his roommate has an expectation of privacy I didn't want any evidence to be thrown out so I got consent from him as well which works equally as well as a SW.

 

[StantonCree]

They had already been told "no" by him, no is no. If they had enough evidence for a warrant they would have gotten a warrant.
They knocked, probably used some intimidation, and then searched.
End run around the 4th. I almost puke agreeing with Ginsberg ....

speculation in these threads is how we end up with a bunch of random "WHAT IF" bickering and getting them locked.

P.S. coming from a guy who does consent searches on a REGULAR basis I can promise you intimidation is a FAILED tactict. When your doing consent searches this way (asking someone thats not that investigation target) its best to be insanely polite, quell all fears of arrest, and ABOVE ALL STICK TO YOUR WORD!!!!!!!!

 

[whistlersmother]

speculation in these threads is how we end up with a bunch of random "WHAT IF" bickering and getting them locked.

P.S. coming from a guy who does consent searches on a REGULAR basis I can promise you intimidation is a FAILED tactict. When your doing consent searches this way (asking someone thats not that investigation target) its best to be insanely polite, quell all fears of arrest, and ABOVE ALL STICK TO YOUR WORD!!!!!!!!

I'm curious as to why you say "intimidation is a FAILED tactict."

Does it fail from the court's view or because the person shuts down and won't give consent?

 

[StantonCree]

I'm curious as to why you say "intimidation is a FAILED tactict."

Does it fail from the court's view or because the person shuts down and won't give consent?

Generally it just pisses people off and triggers there challenge authority button.

It also fails at a court level because it looks bad and the jury (especially in D.C.) donesn't appreciate the Tactict....looks really bad.

 

[Name Taken]

I'm curious as to why you say "intimidation is a FAILED tactict."

Does it fail from the court's view or because the person shuts down and won't give consent?

Both.

It's likely to get a person to say F you and leave.

Second consent has to be knowingly free and voluntary. To the point where the courts have thrown out consent cases for relatively minor things like the number of officers present, officers keeping their hands on their weapons, and to some extent the time of day and location where the person was confronted.

A court isn't going to allow intimidation when you start to validate consent searches.

 

[hylomar]

2 years ago we get a call for a man with a gun at a specific address. We end up meeting 3 women who stated that a male 9then gave a look-out) had asked to pay them for sex. They declined and he got more agressive. They stated that they were not hookers and began to make fun of him and his attempts. He pulled out a gun and stated he was going to kill them. The females got loud and agressive and the man ran inside an apartment building. We surrounded the building and he ended up coming outside. I placed him in cuffs and asked him where the gun is. He stated there was no gun. I asked him for consent to search the apartment and he gave me verbal consent......witnessed by 3 other officers and a Sgt.

Inside the apartment was 2 bedrooms. One was locked and one was open. The open bedroom he stated was his. I searched the open bedroom and was able to find mail matter confirming it was his room. The common areas of the house were searched (kitchen, living room, bathroom, laundry area) as well as the backyard.

We asked him about the locked room and he stated it was his roommates room and that he almost never went in there.

NOW here is where it gets tricky. Legally he gave consent to the entire premise and we had 100% legal justification to go inside the locked room BUT anything of evidenciary value would be thrown out at court because we currently did not have consent to search that room from the roommate and if we found 30 keys of coke it would be thrown out.

My options at the time were get the roommate their and get consent or draw up an emergency SW.

We ended up getting the roommate back to the address and he gave consent. Inside his room was a BB Gun that was identical to the weapon described by the victims (who believed it was a real gun).

He was charged with like 3 crimes (plus he had 3 pending open cases) and after everything was said and done D.C. Sentenced him and ICE got involved. I don't know if he was deported or not, not that, that matters.

The point being here is due to his consent I had every legal right to search that room but because his roommate has an expectation of privacy I didn't want any evidence to be thrown out so I got consent from him as well which works equally as well as a SW.

Does a locked door, drawer, or area become off limits if the owner doesn't want to open it? Does the refusal to open an area create PC for a warrant? Seems that having a person revoke consent or refuse to open a specific area would be the same as refusing the search in the first place.

 

[StantonCree]

Does a locked door, drawer, or area become off limits if the owner doesn't want to open it? Does the refusal to open an area create PC for a warrant? Seems that having a person revoke consent or refuse to open a specific area would be the same as refusing the search in the first place.

Refusal does not create PC for a warrant.

I had a case where we got consent to search a house.....looking for a weapon used in a domestic crime......found a locked safe that had a strong odor of marijuana coming from it.......at the time no one fessed up to the safe so one of my guys got a SW and found weed and PCP?

And to answer your first question quickly....yes

During a consent to search you can basically outline the parameters of the search (not the police). It raises flags when people consent and then say no to specific areas but it DOES NOT constitute PC for a SW.

Drug dealers often hide things in their kids room and tell you they don't want you searching that room because he kids asleep when really that's where there stash is.

 

[danb]

meh. The lesson I take from this is to be nice to the people you are living with, or live alone. If you live with someone, very likely they can consent to a search. If they are sick of your crap they'll let the police come in and maybe haul you to jail. So, play well with others.