United States v. Stephen L. Shlater

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “the consent to search was not a custodial interrogation triggering the previously invoked Miranda right to counsel”
• consent to search home not interrogation under Miranda, even though defendant’s consent provided after request for attorney pursuant to Fifth Amendment
• “Consent searches are valid only if the consent was freely and voluntarily given.”
• cit- ing United States v. Smith, 3 F.3d 1088, 1098 (7th Cir. 1993) (collect- ing cases adopting rule)
• individual had told the police about the evidence at his house at the time of his apprehension — before he invoked his right to counsel and consented to the search of the house
• requests for consent to search do not constitute interrogation under Innis stan- dard

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).