Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103 (2006), is a case in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that without a search warrant, police had no constitutional right to search a house where one resident consents to the search while another resident objects. The Court distinguished this case from the "co-occupant consent rule" established in United States v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164 (1974), which permitted one resident to consent in absence of the co-occupant.
Attributes | Values |
---|
rdf:type
| |
rdfs:label
| |
rdfs:comment
| - Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103 (2006), is a case in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that without a search warrant, police had no constitutional right to search a house where one resident consents to the search while another resident objects. The Court distinguished this case from the "co-occupant consent rule" established in United States v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164 (1974), which permitted one resident to consent in absence of the co-occupant. (en)
|
foaf:name
| - (en)
- Georgia v. Scott Fitz Randolph (en)
|
dct:subject
| |
Wikipage page ID
| |
Wikipage revision ID
| |
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
| |
Link from a Wikipage to an external page
| |
sameAs
| |
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
| |
Dissent
| - Thomas (en)
- Roberts (en)
- Scalia (en)
|
docket
| |
JoinDissent
| |
JoinMajority
| - Stevens, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer (en)
|
LawsApplied
| |
oyez
| |
ParallelCitations
| |
Prior
| |
USPage
| |
USVol
| |
ArgueDate
| |
ArgueYear
| |
case
| - Georgia v. Randolph, (en)
|
DecideDate
| |
DecideYear
| |
findlaw
| |
fullname
| - Georgia v. Scott Fitz Randolph (en)
|
Holding
| - 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. Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed. (en)
|
justia
| |
Litigants
| |
majority
| |
has abstract
| - Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103 (2006), is a case in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that without a search warrant, police had no constitutional right to search a house where one resident consents to the search while another resident objects. The Court distinguished this case from the "co-occupant consent rule" established in United States v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164 (1974), which permitted one resident to consent in absence of the co-occupant. (en)
|
Concurrence
| |