Legal Opinion

Fernandez v. California

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided February 25, 2014No. 12-7822PublishedCited by 204 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Alito

*294Our cases firmly establish that police officers may search jointly occupied premises if one of the occupants1 consents. See United States v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164, 94 S.Ct. 988, 39 L.Ed.2d 242 (1974). In Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103, 126 S.Ct. 1515, 164 L.Ed.2d 208 (2006), we recognized a narrow exception to this rule, holding that the consent of one occupant is insufficient when another occupant is present and objects to the search. In this case, we consider whether Randolph applies *1130if the objecting occupant is absent when another occupant consents. Our opinion in Randolph took great…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. United States v. MatlockSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. Illinois v. RodriguezSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  4. Michigan v. SummersSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  5. Brigham City v. StuartSupreme Court of the United States · 2006

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by204 opinions

  1. Roger Trent v. Steven WadeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2015
  2. United States v. Quartavious DavisCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2015
  3. State v. Byseem T. Coles (070653)Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2014
  4. Lange v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 2021
  5. People v. HarrisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015

199 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API