Sean Hadley v. Hilda Williams

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that when police lie about having a warrant or have an invalid warrant, “consent is vitiated”
• explaining that the law “draws the line at outright fraud, as where police extract a confession in exchange for a false promise to set the defendant free”
• explaining that the law “draws the line at outright fraud, as where police extract a confession in exchange for a false promise to set the defendant free”
• noting that “[a]lthough the law permits the police to pressure and cajole, conceal material facts, and actively mislead, it draws the line at outright fraud” (citation omitted) (in‐ ternal quotation marks omitted)
• reasoning that consent was not voluntary where the defendant’s mother agreed to let police enter only if they had a warrant and the officer falsely responded, “Yes, we’ve got everything we need. It’s all cov- ered.”
• disagreeing with Vaneaton and holding that a warrant is required for police to cross the threshold of a residence to make an arrest even when the door is voluntarily opened

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).