Braskett v. Fender
2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108883
D. Or.2012Background
- Braskett sues under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for Fourth Amendment violations arising from events in April 2010 involving PPB Detective Fender and Officer Tobey, who visited the Brasketts’ home in DVRU capacity.
- Mrs. Braskett, not Braskett, led the officers to the gun in the master bedroom and asked for its removal and for it to be secured.
- The officers obtained consent to enter and to conduct the searches from Mrs. Braskett, who had unfettered access to the residence.
- The searches at issue include the gun removal, examination of prescription bottles in the cabinet, and garbage-can searches.
- Braskett contends Mrs. Braskett lacked capacity to consent; defendants argue consent was valid under the mutual-use/common-authority doctrine.
- Court addresses burden of proving incapacity to consent and weighs whether consent was voluntary under the totality of circumstances.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Mrs. Braskett could validly consent to searches | Braskett argues Mrs. Braskett lacked capacity to consent due to stress | Braskett argues Mrs. Braskett had common authority and capacity | Yes; Mrs. Braskett had common authority and capacity to consent |
| Who bears burden to prove consent capacity in § 1983 context | Braskett contends government bears burden | Defendants argue plaintiff bears burden | Braskett must show lack of consent; if relying on third-party consent, validity must be shown; burden on capacity disputed not essential for summary judgment |
| Whether the gun removal violated the Fourth Amendment | Search of dresser violated rights since consent questionable | Consent via Mrs. Braskett and common authority authorized entry and removal | No violation; consent established and gun removed for safety |
| Whether the medicine cabinet search violated the Fourth Amendment | Information from bottles constitutes private medical records | Common authority over medicine cabinet via Mrs. Braskett; consent valid | No violation; information obtained with valid consent |
| Whether the garbage search violated the Fourth Amendment | Garbage search violated privacy expectations | Consent to search garbage via Mrs. Braskett; Braskett relinquished privacy in curbside waste | No violation; search conducted with Mrs. Braskett's consent |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164 (1974) (consent of a person with common authority valid against nonconsenting co-occupant)
- Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218 (1973) (totality-of-the-circumstances standard for voluntary consent)
- Illinois v. Rodriguez, 497 U.S. 177 (1990) (common authority requires third-party consent when actually shared control exists)
- Larez v. Holcomb, 16 F.3d 1513 (1994) (burden and lack of consent in § 1983 context; plaintiff bears ultimate burden to prove violation)
- United States v. Welch, 4 F.3d 761 (1993) (shared use of property can relinquish privacy interest in host property but not containers)
- United States v. Dowe, 145 F.3d 653 (1998) (§ 1983 standard; deprivation of rights under color of state law)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (burden-sh shifting test for summary judgment)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (non-movant must offer more than a scintilla of evidence)
- In re Oracle Corp. Securities Litigation, 627 F.3d 376 (2010) (summary judgment standards in complex civil cases)