longer.blue

IANAL: 1. The statement should be suppressed because the agents lacked a search warrant to enter the parents’ home. “Break into the parents’ home and search the home” is quite clearly an unlawful search without the homeowners’ consent. Exigent circumstances don’t apply here, so the search, arrest, and therefore statement should be suppressed. Dan would have standing to challenge this because, though he is not a resident, guests still have a reasonable expectation of privacy. (parents would also have standing) 2. I struggle to see how the waiver would be “voluntary” when coerced in this way. I think the fact that his mom is an attorney only compounds the issue. He trusts her on this, both because she’s his mom, and also because she’s an attorney and theoretically should know more about this. The mom was lied to by the FBI, that Dan wouldn’t be charged with a crime, and then the FBI used that lie to coerce Dan through his mom. The statements should be suppressed as the waiver of rights was not voluntary. 3. The original seizure of the thumb drive would be unlawful because the search of the home was unlawful. Further, because the statements should also be suppressed, the search warrant for the data on the thumb drive should not have been granted, and the records should be suppressed. However, if the agents had a search warrant to search for Dan, and arrested him legitimately with the flash drive nearby, then they could probably seize the flash drive as evidence pursuant to a search incident to arrest.