Post by annessalall on Oct 15, 2016 0:49:14 GMT
Christopher Drayton and Clifton Brown were traveling on a Greyhound bus. Three police officers boarded the bus in Tallahassee, Florida for a routine prohibition check. Officer Hoover knelt in the driver’s seat to observe the passengers and to ensure the safety of his fellow officers. Officer Lang and Blackburn walked towards the rear of the bus. Blackburn remained stationed there while Lang questioned passengers from back to front.
Drayton and Brown were seated next to each other. When approached by Lang for questioning they agreed. They also agreed for their bag to be searched. Suspicion arose when Lang noticed their bulky, baggy clothing, which is strange for the warm Florida weather. Permission was granted to Lang when he asked to check Brown and Drayton. After discovering contraband on Brown, he was escorted off the bus by Hoover. Drayton was also arrested and escorted off the bus. Brown possessed three bundles containing 483 grams of cocaine and Drayton possessed two bundles containing 295 grams of cocaine.
They were charged with federal drug crimes. Drayton and Brown claimed that their consent to the pat down search was invalid. The district court ruled that the search was voluntary and that police conduct was not coercive. In a 6-3 opinion, it was ruled that under the fourth amendment police officers are not required to advise bus passengers of their right not to cooperate and to refuse consent to searches. The search was also ruled as voluntary. The dissenting opinion argued that the police investigation amounted to a suspicion less seizure under the Fourth Amendment. If it did, any consent to search was plainly invalid as a product of the illegal seizure.
Personally speaking, even if an officer did not appear intimidating or proceeded in a mannerly fashion I would still give consent. I do not think anyone would want to refuse speaking to an officer for their own well-being. It makes it look like you have something to hide. If there is nothing to hide then why not proceed? Even if the officers informed the passengers that they had the right to deny their requests, I doubt anyone would deny. Also, it was argued that since Drayton witnessed what happened to Brown after being searched, he could have denied the officer’s request. At that point, it was pretty obvious that if Brown was carrying contraband so would Drayton. Drayton felt the need to go through with the procedure because he wanted to avoid any repercussions.
Drayton and Brown were seated next to each other. When approached by Lang for questioning they agreed. They also agreed for their bag to be searched. Suspicion arose when Lang noticed their bulky, baggy clothing, which is strange for the warm Florida weather. Permission was granted to Lang when he asked to check Brown and Drayton. After discovering contraband on Brown, he was escorted off the bus by Hoover. Drayton was also arrested and escorted off the bus. Brown possessed three bundles containing 483 grams of cocaine and Drayton possessed two bundles containing 295 grams of cocaine.
They were charged with federal drug crimes. Drayton and Brown claimed that their consent to the pat down search was invalid. The district court ruled that the search was voluntary and that police conduct was not coercive. In a 6-3 opinion, it was ruled that under the fourth amendment police officers are not required to advise bus passengers of their right not to cooperate and to refuse consent to searches. The search was also ruled as voluntary. The dissenting opinion argued that the police investigation amounted to a suspicion less seizure under the Fourth Amendment. If it did, any consent to search was plainly invalid as a product of the illegal seizure.
Personally speaking, even if an officer did not appear intimidating or proceeded in a mannerly fashion I would still give consent. I do not think anyone would want to refuse speaking to an officer for their own well-being. It makes it look like you have something to hide. If there is nothing to hide then why not proceed? Even if the officers informed the passengers that they had the right to deny their requests, I doubt anyone would deny. Also, it was argued that since Drayton witnessed what happened to Brown after being searched, he could have denied the officer’s request. At that point, it was pretty obvious that if Brown was carrying contraband so would Drayton. Drayton felt the need to go through with the procedure because he wanted to avoid any repercussions.
