CA2: Uncle’s apparent authority over nephew’s room included under the mattress

Defendant stayed with his aunt and uncle in a room that everybody had access to when he wasn’t there. His uncle consented to a search of the room for a firearm when he wasn’t there. He didn’t contest the consent generally, but he argued that the uncle couldn’t consent to a search between the mattress and box springs. “While it may be that there were certain areas or items within the room to which the uncle’s authority to consent did not extend, there is no basis in the record to conclude that the area between Marte-Cruz’s mattress and box spring was one of them.” [Suggesting maybe a different result with a dresser or a suitcase?] United States v. Marte-Cruz, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 19063 (2d Cir. Oct. 29, 2015).

“In this case, the district court found that it was reasonable to believe that Mitchell had apparent authority to consent to the initial search based on the fact that Mitchell told the officers that she lived with Clay for several months, that her appearance corroborated her story that Clay assaulted her that very morning, that she provided information as to the location of Clay’s drugs and gun, and that she was willing to sign a consent form on which she declared the residence her premises.” United States v. Clay, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 19072 (6th Cir. Oct. 30, 2015).*