When “Yes” Actually Means “I Have No Choice” (The 7-Cop Problem)

By: John Guidry

It’s hard to tell the police to “go away.” After all, they’ve got guns. Shiny badges. And they speak in a very authoritative way, kind of like my old gym class teacher.

You know the advice from your humble resident Orlando criminal defense attorney: Before talking with the cops, call me first. But as we’ve seen time and time again, people just don’t listen, and bad things happen as a result.

Such was the case for Manuel Ojeda, who “consented” to a search of his house. Here is how it went down.

Did the police pressure you into letting them inside your home?

That isn’t consent; it’s submission. Call John today at (407) 423-1117.

The Case: State v. Ojeda (The 7:45 AM Wake-Up Call)

At around 7:45 a.m., police arrived at Ojeda’s house without a warrant.

• The Scene: There were four detectives, one sergeant, and two uniformed officers (7 total).
• The Vehicles: Numerous marked police cars were parked in front of his house.
• The Tip: They told Ojeda they had a tip that weed was being grown inside.

Ojeda, likely overwhelmed, invited the detective inside. Five other officers followed. He was given his Miranda warnings, signed a consent-to-search form, and eventually led the police to a marijuana lab in his garage.

The Charge: Ojeda was charged with Possession of Cannabis with Intent to Distribute.

The Ruling: Submission to Authority is Not Consent

The trial court suppressed all the evidence, and the Appellate Court agreed (State v. Ojeda, 2010 WL 4226705).

Why? Florida law says that for consent to be valid, it must be voluntary.

• If a reasonable person would feel like they had to say yes because they were intimidated, that is not consent—that is “Acquiescence to Authority.”

The “Show of Force” Factor: The court noted that while there is no magic number of cops that makes a search illegal, the presence of seven officers and a fleet of marked cars created a “show of authority” that tipped the scales.

• The court reasoned that almost anyone in Ojeda’s position—waking up to a small army on their lawn—would feel they had no choice but to open the door. Therefore, his signature on the form was worthless.

John’s 2026 Update: The Camera Don’t Lie

Note: In 2010, Ojeda was lucky the judge believed his description of the “swarm.” In 2026, we don’t need luck; we have video.

1. The Ring Doorbell Defense In Ojeda, the argument was about how many cops were actually there and how “scary” they looked.

• Today: We pull the Ring or Nest camera footage.
• The Evidence: If the video shows officers with hands on their holsters, tactical vests on, or spreading out to surround the house (a tactic called “perimeters”), we can visually prove the “Show of Force.” A judge seeing 7 armed men on a porch is much more likely to rule the consent “involuntary” than a judge just reading a report.

2. “Constructive Entry” In 2026, courts are stricter about “Knock and Talks.”

• If the police surround your home (blocking the back door while knocking on the front), we argue Constructive Entry. This means they have effectively seized your house before you even open the door. Under Ojeda, any consent you give after they surround you is tainted.

3. The Electronic Warrant Check Police today have tablets that can get a warrant signed electronically in minutes.

• The Argument: If they show up with 7 officers but without a warrant, it proves they did not have probable cause. They needed to scare you into consenting because they legally couldn’t get in any other way. We use this to show their bad faith to the judge.

Don’t Open the Door

If the police are at your door without a warrant, you do not have to let them in, no matter how many of them there are. Talk to them through the Ring camera, or don’t answer at all.

Call me at (407) 423-1117. I’ll handle the introduction.

About John Guidry II

John Guidry II is a seasoned criminal defense attorney and founder of the Law Firm of John P. Guidry II, P.A., located in downtown Orlando next to the Orange County Courthouse, where he has practiced for over 30 years. With more than three decades of experience defending clients throughout Central Florida since 1993, Guidry has successfully defended thousands of cases in Orange, Seminole, Osceola, Brevard, Lake, and Volusia counties. He has built a reputation for his strategic approach to criminal defense, focusing on pretrial motions and case dismissals rather than jury trials.

Guidry earned both his Juris Doctorate and Master of Business Administration from St. Louis University in 1993. He is a member of the Florida Bar and the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. His practice encompasses the full spectrum of Florida state criminal charges, with a particular emphasis on achieving favorable outcomes through thorough pretrial preparation and motion practice.

Beyond the courtroom, Guidry is a prolific legal educator who has authored over 400 articles on criminal defense topics. He shares his legal expertise through his popular YouTube channel, Instagram, and TikTok accounts, where he has built a substantial following of people eager to learn about the law. His educational content breaks down complex legal concepts into accessible information for the general public.

When not practicing law, Guidry enjoys tennis and pickleball, and loves to travel. Drawing from his background as a former recording studio owner and music video producer in the Orlando area, he brings a creative perspective to his legal practice and continues to apply his passion for video production to his educational content.