United States v. Richardson
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 18323
| 7th Cir. | 2011Background
- Richardson was stopped for speeding (80 mph in a 55 mph zone) with a passenger in the vehicle.
- Deputy Smythe conducted a free-air canine search; the dog alerted on both sides of the car.
- Richardson consented to a vehicle search after the canine alerts.
- During a protective pat-down, Smythe found currency and a hard object later identified as cocaine base.
- Smythe removed the pocket object, asked questions, and Richardson made incriminating statements without warnings.
- Richardson was arrested, transported to jail, and later booked; inventory search recovered cocaine base from his sock; no Miranda warnings were administered from arrest to booking.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether all physical evidence should have been suppressed | Richardson argues pat-down inspection violated Dickerson | State argues safe-weapon seizure exceptions and inevitable-discovery via inventory search | No abuse; evidence admissible; pocket object validly inspected under Dickerson/ Terry |
| Whether custodial statements were voluntary or tainted by Miranda violations | Statements were involuntary due to custodial interrogation without warnings | Some statements voluntary; Miranda issue resolved with Elstad framework | Three initial statements voluntary; later spontaneous statements admissible; Miranda warnings not required for listening to voluntary disclosures; taint not proven |
| Whether the Shortt conversation was custodial interrogation triggering Miranda | Conversation amounted to custodial interrogation | Police merely listened; isolated question suppressed; no full interrogation | Not custodial interrogation; voluntary statements admitted; limited questioned response suppressed |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1968) (establishes stop-and-frisk framework for permissible searches)
- United States v. Dickerson, 508 U.S. 366 (U.S. 1993) (limits on extending pat-down when weapon not evident)
- Oregon v. Abdulla, 294 F.3d 830 (7th Cir. 2002) (credibility of voluntariness of statements after Miranda violations)
- United States v. Vasquez, 635 F.3d 889 (7th Cir. 2011) (standard of review for suppression rulings)
- United States v. Cartwright, 630 F.3d 610 (7th Cir. 2010) (inventory search and inevitable discovery; suppression analysis)
- Minnesota v. Dickerson, 508 U.S. 366 (U.S. 1993) (physical manipulation exception to plain-touch doctrine)
- In re Rhode Island v. Innis, 446 U.S. 291 (U.S. 1980) (definition of interrogation for Miranda purposes)
- Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 (U.S. 1981) (voluntariness of statements in presence of police after warnings)
- United States v. Jones, 600 F.3d 847 (7th Cir. 2010) (police listening to voluntary statements; limited questioning)