CA6: A parole search can occur in the place the officers have probable cause to believe the defendant is living, even if that’s not the place she’s officially paroled to

A parole search can occur in the place the officers have probable cause to believe the defendant is living, even if that’s not the place she’s officially paroled to. Ohio statute says the place where the parolee lives. United States v. Payne, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 20789, 2014 FED App. 0813N (6th Cir. October 24, 2014):

Here, Ratleff was subject to Ohio Rev. Code § 2967.131(C), which authorized her parole officer to search her place of residence, with or without a warrant, if the officer had “reasonable grounds to believe that [she] has left the state, is not abiding by the law, or otherwise is not complying with the terms and conditions of [her] conditional pardon, parole, transitional control, other form of authorized release, or post-release control.” There is no dispute that, as Ratleff acknowledged, she was required as a condition of supervision to advise her parole officer of any change of address from her mother’s apartment. We have no difficulty concluding that Officer Niekamp had at least reasonable suspicion that Ratleff was not in compliance with that condition at the time of the search. The district court also required that there be probable cause to believe Ratleff was a resident of the premises to be searched, in reliance on United States v. Bolivar, 670 F.3d 1091, 1094-95 (9th Cir. 2012). The government does not argue that it was error to require probable cause to believe Ratleff resided at the premises to be searched. Because we agree that probable cause existed, it is not necessary to decide whether reasonable suspicion connecting a parolee or probationer to the premises to be searched would be sufficient under the balancing called for by Knights. See, e.g., United States v. Crutchfield, 444 F. App’x 526, 528 (3d Cir. 2011) (declining to reach the issue because probable cause existed).