Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Shyheem J. Miles

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Shyheem J. Miles

Criminal Action-Constitutional Law-Fourth Amendment-Search and Seizure-Omnibus Pretrial Motion-Suppression of Evidence-Consent to Enter Residence-Third Party Lessor-Arrest Warrant-Suspect-Reasonable Belief Suspect Inside Property

Shyheem J. Miles (“Defendant”) filed an Omnibus Pretrial Motion to Suppress Evidence following lodging of criminal charges as a result of entry without a search warrant into a property leased by Ciannie Diggs where Defendant and contraband were located.  Law enforcement had an arrest warrant for Defendant and Ciannie Diggs had indicated that Defendant was at the property at the time when they entered the property.  Defendant alleges that Ciannie Diggs never gave valid consent to enter the property. 

1.  For police to enter a structure based upon consent, the consent must be afforded by someone with authority.

2.  The consent to enter must be unequivocal.

3.  Where Ciannie Diggs stepped aside to allow heavily armed law enforcement to enter the property but never verbally granted consent to enter, Ciannie Diggs did not provide unequivocal voluntary consent for law enforcement to enter the property.

4.  Law enforcement is permitted to enter the residence of a third party to arrest a suspect provided that law enforcement possess a reasonable belief that the suspect is inside the property.

5.  Where the record reflects that law enforcement had an arrest warranted for Defendant, undertook considerable surveillance to verify that Defendant was at the property and Ciannie Diggs told law enforcement when she answered the door that Defendant was inside the property, law enforcement possessed a reasonable belief that Defendant was located inside of the property so as to permit lawful entry into the property in order to apprehend Defendant.  

L.C.C.C.P. No. CR-589-2024, Opinion by Bradford H. Charles, Judge, March 17, 2025.