Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Search and Seizure — warrantless searches

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 31, 2013//

Search and Seizure — warrantless searches

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 31, 2013//

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Criminal

Search and Seizure — warrantless searches — implied consent

Where a suspect responded to a request to enter by stepping back and letting the door open, he implicitly consented to entry.

“Implied consent may be manifested verbally or nonverbally. See Harney v. City of Chi., 702 F.3d 916, 925 (7th Cir. 2012). To be sure, one does not consent to the government entering his home by simply answering the door. Hadley v. Williams, 368 F.3d 747, 750 (7th Cir. 2004). Here, however, Sabo did not simply answer the door. He stepped back and to the side so that McCune could enter. What is more, Sabo’s actions came in direct response to McCune’s request to enter. In other words, McCune asked and Sabo answered, albeit nonverbally. We have recently noted that ‘this court, on more than one occasion, has found that the act of opening a door and stepping back to allow entry is sufficient to demonstrate consent.’ Harney, 702 F.3d at 925 (citing United States v. Walls, 225 F.3d 858, 862-63 (7th Cir. 2000) and Sparing v. Vill. of Olympia Fields, 266 F.3d 684, 690 (7th Cir. 2001)). We make the same finding here—Sabo’s nonverbal cue manifested his implied consent for McCune to enter.”

Affirmed.

12-2700 U.S. v. Sabo

 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Springmann, J., Darrow, J.

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests