U.S. v. Thompson

In prosecution on drug distribution charge, Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s motion to suppress seizure of cocaine that was discovered by police after defendant had given consent to search his apartment, even though defendant argued that he was illegally seized at time he gave consent. Record showed that prior to giving consent to search his apartment, defendant, who had been recently observed in car of third-party, whom police believed had just been involved in large transfer of drugs, was stopped by officer in common area of apartment building. As such, Ct. rejected defendant’s argument that police lacked reasonable suspicion to stop him, or that police improperly frisked him during said stop, given defendant’s connection to third-party and given fact that weapons are common feature of drug trade, and that defendant had lied to officer about not living in apartment building. Also, officer’s seizure of defendant’s keys did not constitute unlawful arrest, where officer told defendant that he was not under arrest, and where defendant had agreed to accompany officer back to defendant’s apartment. Moreover, officer’s opening of defendant’s apartment door with defendant’s keys and officer’s conducting of protective sweep of defendant’s apartment prior to obtaining defendant’s consent to search apartment, did not constitute unlawful search, where defendant had agreed to speak to officer inside defendant’s apartment.