ME: Owner of property consented to police entry; defs didn’t object when they asked what he was doing, so they consented, too

The owner of a camp gave the officer consent to “look around.” When he got inside there were co-tenants and they asked him what he was doing and he told them. They didn’t object, so that was consent. State v. Carton, 2016 ME 119, 2016 Me. LEXIS 131 (July 28, 2016):

[*P20] Randolph, however, does not require law enforcement to affirmatively seek the consent of physically present co-tenants who may object. Id. at 121-22 (holding that there is no need to affirmatively seek the consent of a potentially objecting co-tenant when consent has been given by another co-tenant, unless law enforcement has removed the potentially objecting co-tenant). Here, a uniformed officer entered the camp. The Cartons asked what the officer was doing there, and he informed them that he was there to “look around.” The officer had previously received the consent of the owner to search the camp. Neither of the Cartons affirmatively denied the officer consent to conduct the search. Given the lack of any objection by the Cartons, and because the officer had previously received the consent of the owner to search the camp, the court did not err in concluding that the warrantless search was valid.

This entry was posted in Consent. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.