Fred Cockerham v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida

Fifth Circuit

Fred Cockerham v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida

444 F.2d 438

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedAugust 5, 1971

Docket71-1265_1

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 444 F.2d 438 (Fred Cockerham v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fred Cockerham v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida, 444 F.2d 438 (5th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM:

Fred Cockerham, convicted in a Florida court of the offense of breaking and entering with intent to commit grand lar-cency, was sentenced to imprisonment for eighteen months. In his petition for Federal habeas corpus relief, he argued that the prosecution failed to prove he freely and voluntarily consented to a search leading to the discovery of incriminating evidence in his automobile trunk and that the evidence therefore should have been excluded.¹ The District Court rejected this contention, and we affirm.

Nothing in the record suggests that petitioner’s consent was coerced or involuntary. On the contrary, the testimony establishes that no threats, promises or other inducements of any kind were made by the officers. When they asked for permission to search the car, the petitioner stated that he did not mind and that they could look all they wanted. He even helped out by unlocking and opening the trunk for them.

Under these circumstances we think the facts warrant the finding that the petitioner, with a sufficient awareness of his rights, freely and voluntarily consented to the search, thereby waiving his right to contest its legality. Bretti v. Wainwright, 5 Cir., 1971, 439 F.2d 1042; Perkins v. Henderson, 5 Cir., 1969, 418 F.2d 441.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Fred Cockerham, convicted in a Florida court of the offense of breaking and entering with intent to commit grand lar-cency, was sentenced to imprisonment for eighteen months. In his petition for Federal habeas corpus relief, he argued that the prosecution failed to prove he freely and voluntarily consented to a search leading to the discovery of incriminating evidence in his automobile trunk and that the evidence therefore should have been excluded.¹ The District Court rejected this contention, and we affirm.

Nothing in the record suggests that petitioner’s consent was coerced or involuntary. On the contrary, the testimony establishes that no threats, promises or other inducements of any kind were made by the officers. When they asked for permission to search the car, the petitioner stated that he did not mind and that they could look all they wanted. He even helped out by unlocking and opening the trunk for them.

Under these circumstances we think the facts warrant the finding that the petitioner, with a sufficient awareness of his rights, freely and voluntarily consented to the search, thereby waiving his right to contest its legality. Bretti v. Wainwright, 5 Cir., 1971, 439 F.2d 1042; Perkins v. Henderson, 5 Cir., 1969, 418 F.2d 441.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

444 F.2d 438, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fred-cockerham-v-louie-l-wainwright-director-division-of-corrections-ca5-1971.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack