# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls

For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 7- 22 26

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v.

Leo Lewis Yeag er

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

__ __ __ __ __ __
App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Nor th ern Dis tri ct of I owa - Ft. Do dg e

__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: Decem

be r 14 , 20 17
Fil ed : Ap ril 23 , 20 18 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re WOL LMAN, LOKEN , and MURPHY, Ci rcu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

PER CURI AM.

Leo Yeag er was ch arg ed wit h be in g a fel on in po s s e s s i o n of a fir earm in

vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. §§ 92 2( g) (1 ) an d 9 2 4 ( a ) ( 2 )

. Yeag er m ov ed to su pp res s th e

fir earm , arg ui ng th at it ha d be en se iz ed aft er a warra nt le ss en try in to Yeag er's ho m e
wit ho ut po li ce ha vi ng co ns en t to en te r it

. Fo ll owi ng an ev id en ti a r y h e a rin g, th edi st ric t co ur t de ni ed Yeag er's m ot io n to su pp res s. Yeag er en te red a co nd it io na l pl ea 1

of gu il ty, res erv in g th e rig ht to ap pe al th e de ni al of hi s m ot io n to su pp res s. He no w

ap pe al s t ha t d en ia l. We affir m

.

Yeag er an d hi s gi rlf

rie nd

, Sam an th a Zem

ke

, were in th e pr oc es s of m ov in g in to

a ho us e th at Yeag er's co us in was ren ti ng whe n Yeag er as sa ul te d Zem ke

. Zem ke

so ug ht he lp fro m a ne ig hb o r w h o c al le d th e po li ce. Sh eri ff Dep ut y Co ry Lam pe

res po nd ed to th e cal l, arre st ed Yeag er, an d read hi m hi s Mi ran da rig ht s. Dur in g th e

car rid e, Yeag er to ld Dep ut y Lam pe th at he ha d a fel on y ars on co nv ic ti on an d own ed

a ri fle

.

Zem ke als o wen t t o t he po li ce sta ti on to gi ve he r st at em en t abo ut th e as sa ul t.

As sh e was fin is hi ng he r st at em en t, Dep ut y Lam pe cam e in to th e ro om an d as ke d he r
ab ou t th e gu n. Sh e to ld hi m it was ha ng in g on a wall in th e ho us e. Dep ut y Lam pe

te st ifi ed th at whe n he to ld Zem ke he ne ed ed to ge t th e gu n ou t of the ho us e at so m e

po in t, sh e sa id "Th at 's fin e.

. . . I go tt a ge t st uf f ou t of th e ho us e an y way , so whe n we

ge t do ne he re . . . y ou can m eet us at t he ho us e. I can ge t m y st uf f ou t of the ho us e,

an d th en y ou can ge t th e gu n." Zem ke wan te d Dep ut y Lam

pe t o acco m

pa ny h er to

th e ho us e in cas e Yeag er's co us in was th ere an d up se t th at Yeag er ha d be en arre st ed

. Zem ke di d n ot ha ve a k ey

to th e h ou se , bu t s he to ld th e o ffi cers it was fi ne be cau se Yeag er ha d cl im

be d th ro ug h th e win do ws to ge t in b efo re. W he n th ey go t to th e
ho us e, bo th th e fro nt do or an d th e fro nt w i n d o w w e r e l oc ke d. An of fic er fo un d an

op en win do w wit h an ai r co nd it io ni ng un it

, whi ch Zem ke crawl ed th ro ug h. Sh e th en
le t t he off ic ers in th ro ug h t he fro nt do or an d l ed th em to th e ro om

wit h t he rif

le

.

The Hon or ab le Mar k W

. Ben ne t, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e Nor th ern 1

Dis tri ct of Io wa, ad op ti ng th e rep or t a n d r e c o m m en da ti on of th e Hon or ab le C.J

. W il li am s, Un it ed Sta te s M ag is tra te Ju dg e fo r th e Nor th ern Dis tri ct of I owa

.

-2

-W he n rev ie win g th e de ni al of a m ot io n to su pp res s, " w e rev ie w th e di st ric t

co ur t's fact ua l fin di ng s fo r cl ear erro r an d it s le ga l c o nc lu si on s de no vo ." Uni te d

St at es v. Ahu m ad a, 85 8 F.3 d 11 38

, 11 39 (8 th Ci r. 20 17 ). The di st ric t co ur t's fin di ng

th at Zem ke vo lu nt ari ly co ns en te d to th e of fic ers ' en try is a f

a c t u a l fin di ng th at we

rev ie w fo r cl ear erro r. See Uni te d St at es v. You s i f

, 3 0 8 F

. 3d 82 0, 83 0 (8 th Ci r.

20 02 ).

Abs en t vo lu nt ary co ns en t o r e xi ge nt ci rcu m st an ces , po li ce m ay no t en te r a

pr iv a t e h o me t o co nd uc t a warra nt le ss se arch

. See Uni te d St at es v. Lak os ke y , 46 2

F.3 d 9 6 5

, 9 7 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 06 ). "[Zem ke ]'s co ns en t was vo lu nt ary if it was 'th e

pr od uc t of an es se nt ia ll y free an d un co ns tra in ed ch oi ce by it s m ak er' rat he r th an 'th e

pr od uc t of du res s or co erci on , ex pr es s or im pl ie d.'" See Uni te d St at es v. Ch ai de z,

90 6 F.2 d 37 7, 38 0 (8 th Ci r. 19 90 ) (q uo ti ng Sch ne ck lo th v. Bu st am on te

, 41 2 U.S. 21 8,

22 5, 22 7 (1 97 3) ). W he n de te rm in in g whe th er a pe rs on 's co ns en t was vo lu nt ary, we

co ns id er th e to ta li ty of th e ci rcu m st an ces , whi ch i n c l u d e s th e ch arac te ris ti cs of th e

pe rs on gi vi ng co ns en t an d t h e e n vi ro nm en t in whi ch co ns en t was gi ve n. Id

. at

38 0– 81

.

The di st ric t co ur t's fin di ng of fact is no t cl earl y erro ne ou s. Zem ke was twen tysi x y ears ol d at th e ti m e of th e in ci de nt , h ad gr ad ua te d fro m hi gh sc ho ol , and ha d a

fu ll ti m e job

. Sh e cam e to th e po li ce st at io n vo lu nt ari ly to gi ve a st at em en t ab ou t th e

as sa ul t. Sh e was no t in cu st od y or un de r arre st at an y ti m e an d te st ifi ed th at sh e di d

no t be li ev e sh e was req ui red to be th ere. Dep ut y Lam pe di d no t m ak e an y pr om is es

or m is rep res en ta ti on s to ob ta in he r co ns en t to en te r th e ho us e; he de sc rib ed th e to ne

of th ei r co nv ers at io n at th e po li ce st at io n as fri en dl y

. The di st ric t cou rt di d no t fin d

cred ib le Zem

ke 's te st im on y th at

, on ce at th e ho us e an d face d wit h th e lo ck ed do or an d

win do w, sh e to ld Dep ut y Lam pe th at sh e co ul d co m e ba ck an d g e t he r be lo ng in gs

la te r. And ev en if Zem

ke ha d sa id wha t sh e cl ai m ed sh e di d, th e di st ric t co ur t di d no t

cl earl y err in fin di ng th at th i s w o u ld no t co ns ti tu te a wit hd rawal of co ns en t. W e

-3

-th eref

or e co nc lu de th e di st ric t co ur t's fin di ng th at Zem ke vo lu nt ari ly co ns en te d to th e

of fic ers ' en try was n ot cle arl y erro ne ou s.

Acco rd in gl y , th e jud gm en t o f th e d is tri ct co ur t i s af fir m ed

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-4

-