S.D.Ill.: To claim denial of consent over cotenant under Randolph, def has to prove something; here nothing

Defendant’s co-tenant, away from the premises, consented to a search. Defendant was there and alleges in the motion he protested the consent search. Under Randolph, “Absent exigent circumstances, a warrantless search of a home based on a co-tenant’s consent is unreasonable in the face of a present tenant’s express objection. Once the objecting tenant leaves, however, social expectations shift, and the tenant assumes the risk that a co-tenant may allow the police to enter even knowing that the tenant would object or continue to object if present. Both presence and objection by the tenant are required to render a consent search unreasonable as to him.” The officers testified that he never objected, and defendant didn’t testify at the suppression hearing. Therefore, the court finds defendant did not object. United States v. Thornton, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 184141 (S.D. Ill. Nov. 6, 2017).

This entry was posted in Consent. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.