Court Opinion

ID: 9476785
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 06:05:33.238813+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:45:30.668074
License: Public Domain

NORRIS, Circuit Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part:
I join Judge Anderson’s opinion with one caveat. I see no basis in the record for a finding that the officers were authorized by Julie Sealey to saw the sealed PVC pipes open to search for controlled substances. To consent to a search is one thing; to consent to the destruction of property is quite another. To illustrate, Julie Sealey’s consent to search for drugs was broad enough to authorize the officers to open bureau drawers; it did not, however, authorize them to destroy the bureau to discover the contents of the drawers. In my view, the officers should have obtained her specific consent to saw the PVC pipes open before doing so. Thus I would suppress the evidence of the controlled substances found inside the pipes. I would not, however, suppress the evidence of the controlled substances which the officers found without destroying property.