Informant Couldn't Consent to Entry by Officers

Callahan v. Millard Co., UT, et al, -- F.3d --, 2007 WL 2028971 (10th Cir. 7/16/07) - officers violated Mr. Callahan's clearly established constitutional rights by entering his home without a warrant, direct consent, or exigent circumstances after an informant bought meth from him. The district court erred in granting summary judgment based on qualified immunity derived from the "consent-once-removed" doctrine. While that doctrine permits an undercover officer invited into a home to summon other officers for assistance after establishing pc for search or arrest, the 10th decides the consent exception should not be broadened to cover an informant's invitation to police to enter a home. The distinction is that consent to entry by an undercover officer covers additional backup officers, whereas an individual does not consent to police entry by inviting an informant to enter. In light of clearly established law and the available info, reasonable officers would not have believed their warrantless entry of Mr. Callahan's home was lawful.