Wife’s common authority reasonably believed to extend to an unmarked briefcase

Wife had apparent authority to consent to a search of a briefcase in the common area. United States v. Gallagher, 66 M.J. 250 (C.A.A.F. 2008):

Today we are asked the question whether, when one spouse consents to a search of the entire house, the apparent authority doctrine extends that consent to an androgynous, unmarked, unlocked, briefcase kept in a common area of the home, which could reasonably hold the object of the search. Based on the facts of this case, we hold that it was not objectively unreasonable for the officer to believe the consent to search the home extended to the briefcase, and the apparent authority doctrine applies. Because Appellant’s wife had apparent authority to consent to the search, the military judge did not abuse his discretion in admitting the evidence found in the briefcase during the permissive search or the evidence based on the derivative seizure and subsequent command authorized search of Appellant’s computer.

Common user could consent to an entry onto a loading dock and a protective sweep, but the user could not consent to a search of a closed box. United States v. Diaz, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 10777 (11th Cir. May 16, 2008) (unpublished).*

Defendant failed to show that the officer withheld material information from the magistrate or that he knew of what was attributed to him by defendant. United States v. Lum, 557 F. Supp. 2d 461 (D. Del. 2008).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.