The
6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Thursday that providing
police with consent to search one’s premises falls outside of a person’s right
not to be questioned, and does not create an incriminating statement under the
Fifth Amendment.
In
USA v. Calvetti, Judge Richard Griffin was joined by Judge Richard
Suhrheinrich and Judge John Rogers in the ruling, commenting that consent to a
search is not incriminating because it is not testimonial or communicative
evidence. This decision brings the 6th Circuit states (Ohio,
Kentucky, Tennessee and Michigan) in agreement with most other circuits.
In
the case, Sarah Calvetti was stopped during a traffic stop and consented to a
search of her vehicle. During the search, Department of State Police troopers
found 16 kilograms of cocaine. After her arrest, Ms. Calvetti signed a Miranda form and indicated she did not
want to be questioned. She was questioned anyway. During her trial, Ms.
Calvetti argued the violation of her Miranda
rights tainted her consent to a search, to which the trial court disagreed.
Judge
Griffin agreed with the lower court, adding the law protecting a defendant from
unlawful questioning does not extend to a search the defendant allowed.