1. In Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429, 438 (1991), the defendant contended “that no reasonable person would freely consent to a search of luggage that he or she knows contains drugs.” Should there be a presumption of involuntariness when incriminating evidence is readily found pursuant to the “consent” of a person who denies guilt?
There should be a presumption of involuntariness when incriminating evidence is readily found pursuant to the consent of a person who denies guilt because the defendant is not going to want to confirm whether that evidence is theirs or not. They don’t want to see themselves get punished even though they knew that they have done something wrong.
2. Assume that consent to obtain a blood sample from a rape suspect
There should be a presumption of involuntariness when incriminating evidence is readily found pursuant to the consent of a person who denies guilt because the defendant is not going to want to confirm whether that evidence is theirs or not. They don’t want to see themselves get punished even though they knew that they have done something wrong.
2. Assume that consent to obtain a blood sample from a rape suspect