P v. BOYER
Filed 5/11/06
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA
THE PEOPLE, )
)
v. )
Defendant and Appellant. ) Super. Ct. No. C-51866
___________ )
Story Continued from Part III ………
Then, before defendant had said anything incriminating that might further isolate him as a suspect, the police asked for his consent to search the El Monte house.[1] When defendant said it was up to Cornwell, they immediately pursued that avenue by dispatching the officers who were standing by in El Monte to request Cornwell's permission. Under these circumstances, the record sufficiently establishes that, aside from their illegal detention and interrogation of defendant, the police meant to search the house, and to do so with the permission of an authorized consenter if possible.
Defendant next urges the evidence fails to show that, absent the illegal police conduct against defendant, Cornwell would inevitably have consented to the search. We need not resolve this question directly because, even if Cornwell's consent was not â€
