Com. v. Fredrick, J., Jr.
230 A.3d 1263
Pa. Super. Ct.2020Background:
- Appellant Jacob W. Fredrick was evicted from his Dover, PA mobile home on Dec. 8, 2017; locks were changed by community constables.
- On Dec. 11, Fredrick called Sergeant Michael Bosco reporting a suspected burglary and telling police he stored 30–35 firearms under the mattress in the middle bedroom and fearing those weapons might be stolen and used to harm others.
- YCM maintenance let Sergeant Bosco into the locked trailer; Bosco conducted a protective sweep, entered the middle bedroom, and found two long guns in cases and some BB guns under the mattress.
- Police discovered Fredrick was a person prohibited from possessing firearms; Fredrick later admitted some weapons were unregistered or had obliterated serial numbers, and no missing guns were recovered.
- Fredrick moved to suppress the firearms as the product of an illegal warrantless search; the suppression court denied the motion, he was convicted at a bench trial, sentenced to 3–6 years, and appealed.
- The Superior Court affirmed, holding the warrantless entry/search was permissible because Fredrick impliedly consented by summoning police and describing the location of dangerous firearms, creating a public-safety imperative.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the warrantless entry/search of Fredrick’s locked mobile home was lawful | Fredrick: police entered and searched without a warrant or his express permission; entry was illegal. | Commonwealth: Fredrick summoned police as a victim, repeatedly described firearms’ location and public-safety risk, thereby impliedly consenting to entry and investigation. | Court held implied consent existed; warrantless entry/search was lawful and suppression denial affirmed. |
| Whether police exceeded the scope of any consent by entering the bedroom and checking under the mattress | Fredrick: even if police were allowed on premises, they lacked authority to search his bedroom/under mattress. | Commonwealth: consent to investigate missing firearms under the mattress reasonably included entry into the bedroom and inspection under the mattress. | Court held scope was objectively reasonable to include the bedroom and mattress check; seized evidence admissible. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Cartagena, 63 A.3d 294 (Pa. Super. 2013) (standards for appellate review of suppression rulings)
- Commonwealth v. Kemp, 961 A.2d 1247 (Pa. Super. 2008) (warrantless searches presumptively unreasonable; consent is an established exception)
- Commonwealth v. Witman, 750 A.2d 327 (Pa. Super. 2000) (police entry may be impliedly consented to where a caller summons police as a victim and frames the investigation)
- Commonwealth v. Wilmer, 194 A.3d 564 (Pa. 2018) (consent may be express or implied; discusses scope and reentry issues)
- Commonwealth v. Smith, 77 A.3d 562 (Pa. 2013) (consent evaluated under totality of the circumstances)
- Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218 (U.S. 1973) (voluntariness of consent is a factual question judged by the totality of circumstances)
- Commonwealth v. Reid, 811 A.2d 530 (Pa. 2002) (scope of consent measured by what a reasonable person would have understood)