United States v. James Faler, 832 F.3d 849

Louisville leasing consultant reported James Faler (a nonresident and registered sex offender in Iowa) was acting suspiciously and had taken a child into an apartment where he was staying.
Three uniformed officers went to resident Michael Parks’ ground-floor apartment, knocked, and Parks answered. Faler emerged from a back room as officers spoke with Parks.
Officers testified they asked permission to enter; Parks gestured toward Faler and stepped aside, and officers entered. The district court credited the officers’ testimony and found implied consent.
About 30 minutes after entry, officers arrested Faler for failing to register as a sex offender. While escorting him to a patrol car, Faler asked officers to retrieve his medication from a backpack in his bedroom.
Officer Moss searched the backpack for officer safety, found photos of Faler with minors, obtained Parks’ consent to search the apartment, seized electronics, and later secured a warrant for the backpack and media that revealed child pornography.
Faler moved to suppress the backpack evidence and derivative evidence, arguing the officers’ entry and his arrest were unconstitutional; the district court denied suppression and the court of appeals affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether officers’ entry into Parks’ apartment violated the Fourth Amendment	Faler: Entry was unlawful; Parks did not validly consent and officers effectively forced entry to arrest Faler	Government: Parks implicitly consented by gesturing and stepping aside; officers requested permission to enter	Court: No clear error in district court’s finding of implied consent; entry lawful
Whether evidence from backpack is fruit of poisonous tree from unlawful entry	Faler: But for illegal entry/arrest, backpack would not have been searched and pornographic evidence found	Government: Consent and attenuation; even if entry were illegal, Faler’s request for the backpack and subsequent actions attenuated any taint	Court: Because entry was lawful (and alternatively because seizure was attenuated), suppression not required
Standard of review for consent/findings	Faler: District court erred in crediting officers over his and Parks’ statements	Government: Credibility determinations entitled to deference; factual finding reviewed for clear error	Court: Reviewed factual findings for clear error and legal conclusions de novo; no clear error in consent finding
Whether gestures can constitute implied consent to enter	Faler: Gestures/stepping aside insufficient and ambiguous	Government: Body language and stepping aside have sufficed in precedent to show implied consent	Court: Gestures here akin to prior cases and support implied consent finding

United States v. Johnson, 619 F.3d 910 (8th Cir.) (standard of review for suppression rulings)
United States v. Jones, 254 F.3d 692 (8th Cir.) (objective test for implied consent based on conduct)
Donovan v. Dewey, 452 U.S. 594 (U.S.) (warrant requirement for home entries absent consent or exigency)
United States v. Lakoskey, 462 F.3d 965 (8th Cir.) (consent to enter from person with authority)
United States v. Gregory, 302 F.3d 805 (8th Cir.) (deference to district court credibility findings)
United States v. Smith, 973 F.2d 1374 (8th Cir.) (gestures/stepping aside can imply consent)
United States v. Turbyfill, 525 F.2d 57 (8th Cir.) (opening door and stepping back as implied consent)
United States v. Ramirez-Chilel, 289 F.3d 744 (11th Cir.) (body language yielding right-of-way can imply consent)