United States v. Frankie Little, 431 F. App'x 417

Defendant Frankie Joe Little appeals his conviction for sexual exploitation of a minor under 18 U.S.C. § 2251(a).
Police sought to question Little after learning of sexually explicit photos taken of a fourteen-year-old; guardian reported the conduct.
Officer Harper went first to Little’s home, then to Little’s mother’s home and entered the residence without a warrant or consent request.
Little handed over his cell phone; officers later obtained the phone and reviewed photos at the police department.
District court denied the motion to suppress; Little pleaded guilty preserving the right to appeal the suppression ruling.
The district court sentenced Little to 180 months in prison and eight years of supervised release.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether there was valid consent to entry	State contends implied consent existed from Little's cooperation.	Little argues no valid consent; entry required warrant or explicit consent.	No valid consent; entry violated the Fourth Amendment.
Whether exigent circumstances justified seizure	Exigent circumstances could justify obtaining the phone.	No exigent justification for the initial entry or seizure.	Not reached; suppression based on unlawful entry tainted the seizure.

Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218 (Sup. Ct. 1973) (consent to search must be voluntary)
United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544 (Sup. Ct. 1980) (totality of the circumstances governs voluntariness of consent)
United States v. Elkins, 300 F.3d 638 (6th Cir. 2002) (cooperation supports implied consent)
United States v. Carter, 378 F.3d 584 (6th Cir. 2004) (recognizable police; stepping aside can imply consent)
Bashir v. Rockdale Cnty., Ga., 445 F.3d 1323 (11th Cir. 2006) (consent cannot be inferred from disengagement and walking into a house)
United States v. Worley, 193 F.3d 380 (6th Cir. 1999) (expressions of futility do not indicate voluntary consent)