kkeele
03-28-2008, 09:19 AM
I would like to get everyone's thoughts on the following scenario...
On a particular day in April 2007, the Drug Task Force in our area utilized an informant to make a crack cocaine purchase from a female at her residence. After several unrecorded telephone calls to set up the transaction, one of the DTF Agents wired the CI and drove him to the female's residence, where the CI got out of the Agent's vehicle, walked to the residence, and went inside.
Once inside, the CI spoke with the female; the female told the CI that she did not have the crack cocaine, but "John," who happened to be a relative of the CI, would be delivering the crack cocaine to the female's residence. The CI was taken into a bedroom and the door was closed. The CI did not see any money or crack cocaine exchange hands between "John" and the female, but the CI did hear a voice which the CI identified as belonging to "John" talking to the female. At suppression hearing, the CI backed up on this statement, acknowledging that there were 7 -8 adults and several small children in the residence, and the voice that the CI heard conversing with the female could have been someone other than "John."
DTF Agents testified that they observed a vehicle (conflicting descriptions of the vehicle in Agents' testimony) come to and leave from the female's residence, which agents later "identified" as belonging to "John."
"John" was not the target of this investigation, and "John" was not known to the Drug Task Force as being involved in the crack cocaine trade prior to this incident.
A second deal was done later that same day, utilizing the same CI and the target was the same female as the earlier transaction. During this transaction, it is undisputed that "John" was not observed going to / leaving from the female's residence.
The DTF Agents testified that they had set up surveillance on "John's" residence, hoping to catch John leaving the residence so the DTF Agents could execute a traffic stop. Approximately 2 hours after the second deal was consumated between the female and the CI, John was observed leaving his residence with two small children. One DTF Agent followed "John," and allegedly observed "John" run two stop signs.
The agent who had observed the stop sign violation radioed ahead, and John was stopped by two other DTF Agents; the agent who had observed the original stop sign violation did not participate in the traffic stop.
The DTF Agents who stopped "John" ordered "John" to exit his vehicle, and then explained to "John" that "John" had been stopped because the DTF had probable cause to arrest "John" for the two felony drug transactions between the CI and the female earlier in the day, and that "John" committed the offense of Conspiracy to Distribute Crack Cocaine. Next, the DTF patted down AND physically searched "John's" person by removing the contents of "John's" pockets. Agents found a small number of bills which had been photocopied and used in the first drug buy at the female's residence. The DTF also searched "John's" vehicle, but found nothing.
John was kept at the scene of the traffic stop for approximately 30 minutes, which was deemed to be a valid custodial arrest by the Judge who presided over the suppression hearing. The search yielding the photocopied money was ruled to be a valid search incident to arrest.
NOW, after keeping "John" on the side of the road for approximately 30 minutes, the DTF was finally able to obtain consent to search "John's" residence, after agreeing to let John's children be released to a relative and also telling John that if John cooperated, the DTF would not seize John's vehicle.
John was forced to lock up his vehicle and leave it at the convenience store where John was stopped, and John was transported back to John's residence by DTF Agents. At the residence, the DTF Agents told John to show the agents where everything was located, and the agents would not "mess up" John's residence. John showed the agents where a small quantity of crack cocaine was located, and then the agents continued to search the residence. A search of the residence yielded crack cocaine, cash, and firearms.
AFTER the search was completed, John was Mirandized for the first time, and asked to repeat the statements he had made throughout the search (first time I've sold anything, etc). John was also asked to become an information source for the DTF. The DTF Agents told John that John was not going to be charged at that time, and asked John to give some consideration to cooperating, and the DTF would help John avoid jail time. John never contacted the DTF, and the DTF never made any additional contact with John.
John was ot formally indicted and arrested on charges stemminf from the CI buys, traffic stop, and search of the residence until some 9 - 10 months later.
My questions are:
1. Did the DTF have probable cause to arrest John for the drug buys / conspiracy at the time of the traffic stop in April 2007?
2. Was the search of John's person a valid search incident to arrest, even though John was not "formally arrested" or charged at that time, but was only subjected to a "custodial arrest?"
3. What would begin to be an inappropriate amount of time that a person could be held on the riadside under "custodial arrest" without being charged, transported to jail, and booked?
4. If a person is under custodial arrest, when are the Miranda warnings triggered?
5. Would John have been entitled to his Miranda Warnings after DTF advised John that they had probably cause to arrest John on felony charges, but prior to being asked for consent to search?
6. Has anyone had a case similar, in that John was never presented with a written Miranda warning and waiver to sign, and also was never presented with a written consent and waiver to search form. The officers are relying only on verbal consent, and also only verbally Mirandized John prior to taking a statement at John's residence after the search was completed?
On a particular day in April 2007, the Drug Task Force in our area utilized an informant to make a crack cocaine purchase from a female at her residence. After several unrecorded telephone calls to set up the transaction, one of the DTF Agents wired the CI and drove him to the female's residence, where the CI got out of the Agent's vehicle, walked to the residence, and went inside.
Once inside, the CI spoke with the female; the female told the CI that she did not have the crack cocaine, but "John," who happened to be a relative of the CI, would be delivering the crack cocaine to the female's residence. The CI was taken into a bedroom and the door was closed. The CI did not see any money or crack cocaine exchange hands between "John" and the female, but the CI did hear a voice which the CI identified as belonging to "John" talking to the female. At suppression hearing, the CI backed up on this statement, acknowledging that there were 7 -8 adults and several small children in the residence, and the voice that the CI heard conversing with the female could have been someone other than "John."
DTF Agents testified that they observed a vehicle (conflicting descriptions of the vehicle in Agents' testimony) come to and leave from the female's residence, which agents later "identified" as belonging to "John."
"John" was not the target of this investigation, and "John" was not known to the Drug Task Force as being involved in the crack cocaine trade prior to this incident.
A second deal was done later that same day, utilizing the same CI and the target was the same female as the earlier transaction. During this transaction, it is undisputed that "John" was not observed going to / leaving from the female's residence.
The DTF Agents testified that they had set up surveillance on "John's" residence, hoping to catch John leaving the residence so the DTF Agents could execute a traffic stop. Approximately 2 hours after the second deal was consumated between the female and the CI, John was observed leaving his residence with two small children. One DTF Agent followed "John," and allegedly observed "John" run two stop signs.
The agent who had observed the stop sign violation radioed ahead, and John was stopped by two other DTF Agents; the agent who had observed the original stop sign violation did not participate in the traffic stop.
The DTF Agents who stopped "John" ordered "John" to exit his vehicle, and then explained to "John" that "John" had been stopped because the DTF had probable cause to arrest "John" for the two felony drug transactions between the CI and the female earlier in the day, and that "John" committed the offense of Conspiracy to Distribute Crack Cocaine. Next, the DTF patted down AND physically searched "John's" person by removing the contents of "John's" pockets. Agents found a small number of bills which had been photocopied and used in the first drug buy at the female's residence. The DTF also searched "John's" vehicle, but found nothing.
John was kept at the scene of the traffic stop for approximately 30 minutes, which was deemed to be a valid custodial arrest by the Judge who presided over the suppression hearing. The search yielding the photocopied money was ruled to be a valid search incident to arrest.
NOW, after keeping "John" on the side of the road for approximately 30 minutes, the DTF was finally able to obtain consent to search "John's" residence, after agreeing to let John's children be released to a relative and also telling John that if John cooperated, the DTF would not seize John's vehicle.
John was forced to lock up his vehicle and leave it at the convenience store where John was stopped, and John was transported back to John's residence by DTF Agents. At the residence, the DTF Agents told John to show the agents where everything was located, and the agents would not "mess up" John's residence. John showed the agents where a small quantity of crack cocaine was located, and then the agents continued to search the residence. A search of the residence yielded crack cocaine, cash, and firearms.
AFTER the search was completed, John was Mirandized for the first time, and asked to repeat the statements he had made throughout the search (first time I've sold anything, etc). John was also asked to become an information source for the DTF. The DTF Agents told John that John was not going to be charged at that time, and asked John to give some consideration to cooperating, and the DTF would help John avoid jail time. John never contacted the DTF, and the DTF never made any additional contact with John.
John was ot formally indicted and arrested on charges stemminf from the CI buys, traffic stop, and search of the residence until some 9 - 10 months later.
My questions are:
1. Did the DTF have probable cause to arrest John for the drug buys / conspiracy at the time of the traffic stop in April 2007?
2. Was the search of John's person a valid search incident to arrest, even though John was not "formally arrested" or charged at that time, but was only subjected to a "custodial arrest?"
3. What would begin to be an inappropriate amount of time that a person could be held on the riadside under "custodial arrest" without being charged, transported to jail, and booked?
4. If a person is under custodial arrest, when are the Miranda warnings triggered?
5. Would John have been entitled to his Miranda Warnings after DTF advised John that they had probably cause to arrest John on felony charges, but prior to being asked for consent to search?
6. Has anyone had a case similar, in that John was never presented with a written Miranda warning and waiver to sign, and also was never presented with a written consent and waiver to search form. The officers are relying only on verbal consent, and also only verbally Mirandized John prior to taking a statement at John's residence after the search was completed?