MO: Absent objecting target of search can’t invoke Randolph

Absent objecting defendant did not stand in the position of the present and objecting target in Randolph. State v. Oliver, 2008 Mo. App. LEXIS 1756 (December 16, 2008):

Fourth, there is no obligation that the officers had to tell Wife that Appellant had previously refused to give his consent to search. See Hudspeth, 518 F.3d at 959. Wife was in the bedroom speaking to the caseworker when Appellant informed the officers that they needed to get a search warrant for the computer and there is nothing in the record which suggests Wife knew Husband had previously denied consent. “Thus, we must conclude [the officers’] failure to advise [Wife] of her husband’s earlier objection to a search of the home computer did not convert an otherwise reasonable search into an unreasonable one.” Hudspeth, 518 F.3d at 960-61. “[T]he Fourth Amendment’s reasonableness requirement did not demand that the officers inform [Wife] of her husband’s refusal.” Id. at 960.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.