NC: Wife had sufficient common authority over cell phone to consent to seizure and search

Defendant allowed his cell phone to be used by everyone in the family, including his child to watch YouTube videos. His wife had sufficient common authority to consent to a seizure and search. State v. Duran-Rivas, 2024 N.C. App. LEXIS 557 (July 2, 2024).

“The inconsistency [in the affidavit] is the product of an incorrect assumption that was later corrected through additional investigation—i.e., nothing more than an innocent mistake. And ‘[a]llegations of negligence or innocent mistake[s] are insufficient’ to warrant a Franks hearing. Franks, 438 U.S. at 171. What’s more, it is not clear that the two statements are necessarily in conflict. Though the record is silent on the question, it is conceivable that Neely’s physical description is similar to Ellison’s.” No Franks hearing. United States v. Ellison, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116655 (E.D. Mich. July 2, 2024).*

A license plate that was crooked because only one bolt held it was justification for a stop. State v. Kirby, 2024-Ohio-2543 (5th Dist. July 1, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Apparent authority, Cell phones, Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.