Georgia v. Scott Fitz Randolph (547 U.S. 103)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided March 22, 2006 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 547 U.S. 103 · 126 S. Ct. 1515
- Decided
- March 22, 2006
- Term
- October Term 2005
- Vote
- 5–3
- Majority author
- Justice Souter
- Issue area
- Criminal Procedure
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Justice Souter delivered the opinion of the Court. The Fourth Amendment recognizes a valid warrantless entry and search of premises when police obtain the voluntary consent of an occupant who shares, or is reasonably believed to share, authority over the area in common with a co-occupant who later objects to the use of evidence so obtained. Illinois v. Rodriguez, 497 U. S. 177 (1990); United States v. Matlock, 415 U. S. 164 (1974). The question here is whether such an evidentiary seizure is likewise lawful with the permission of one occupant when the other, who later seeks to suppress the evidence, is present at the scene and expressly refuses to consent. We hold that, in the circumstances here at issue, a physically present co-occupant’s stated refusal to permit entry prevails, rendering the warrantless search unreasonable and invalid as to him. I Respondent Scott Randolph and his wife, Janet, separated in late May 2001, when she left the marital residence in Americus, Georgia, and went to stay with her parents in Canada, taking their son and some belongings. In July, she returned to the Americus house with the child, though the record does not reveal whether her object was reconciliation or retrieval of remaining possessions. On the morning of July 6, she complained to the police that after a domestic dispute her husband took their son away, and when officers reached the…
Excerpt of a 35,614-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.