U.S. Supreme Court
Search and Seizure — warrantless searches — consent
Where a co-resident consented to a search, well after the resident had been removed from their apartment, his earlier objection does not require suppression of the evidence.
Petitioner claims that his expansive interpretation of Randolph would not hamper law enforcement because in most cases where officers have probable cause to arrest a physically present objector they also have probable cause to obtain a warrant to search the premises that the objector does not want them to enter. But he misunderstands the constitutional status of consent searches, which are permissible irrespective of the availability of a warrant. Requiring officers to obtain a warrant when a warrantless search is justified may interfere with law enforcement strategies and impose an unmerited burden on the person willing to consent to an immediate search.
208 Cal. App. 4th 100, 145 Cal. Rptr. 3d 51, affirmed.
Alito, J.; Scalia, J., concurring; Thomas, J., concurring; Ginsburg, J., dissenting.