{"id":4935,"date":"2010-11-27T10:50:54","date_gmt":"2010-11-27T10:46:56","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2010-11-27T10:46:56","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=4935","title":{"rendered":"N.D.Ga.: Consent to search a separate house on a family compound was not reasonable; there was a duty to inquire"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Officers were on the Green family compound, and they received consent from one person to search another&#8217;s home. Here, the officers were on notice that others lived in various places and it was not reasonable to get consent from one to search the dwelling of another. &#8220;<a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=14171768895681052043&amp;q=497%2Bu.s.%2B177&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=1002\">Rodriguez<\/a> placed some responsibility on the officer to assess the situation he faces critically.&#8221; United States v. Green, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124735 (N.D. Ga. October 6, 2010):<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=14171768895681052043&amp;q=497%2Bu.s.%2B177&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=1002\">Rodriguez<\/a> placed some responsibility on the officer to assess the situation he faces critically: \u201cEven when the invitation is accompanied by an explicit assertion that the person lives there, the surrounding circumstances could conceivably be such that a reasonable person would doubt its truth and not act upon it without further inquiry.\u201d <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=14171768895681052043&amp;q=497%2Bu.s.%2B177&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=1002\">Rodriguez<\/a>, 497 U.S. at 188. This duty of inquiry is triggered, for example, when the officer obtains information that is subject to differing interpretations. See <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=16608602017301756132&amp;q=426+F.3d+838&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=1002\">United States v. Waller<\/a>, 426 F.3d 838, 847 (6th Cir. 2005) (\u201ca number of other courts have also recognized an officer\u2019s duty to inquire in ambiguous situations\u201d); United States v. Chun Yen Chiu, 857 F. Supp. 353, 361 (D.N.J. 1993) (\u201cWhere police officers are faced with an ambiguous situation, unless further inquiry is made which determines that the property about to be searched is subject to \u2018mutual use\u2019 by the person giving consent, it is unlawful to enter without a warrant.\u201d).<\/p>\n<p>In this case, it is undisputed that Mr. Green invited Deputy Davenport to enter his uncle\u2019s apartment. However, it would be unreasonable for \u201claw enforcement agents to believe in every instance that someone who invites them into a home or a room is authorized to do so.\u201d <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=17947013018964922752&amp;q=962+F.2d+733&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=1002\">United States v. Rosario<\/a>, 962 F.2d 733, 738 (7th Cir. 1992). The Rosario court applied the \u201cfurther inquiry\u201d language from Rodriguez to suggest that, \u201cin the absence of sufficient facts, officers have a duty to seek further information in order to determine whether they may reasonably infer that the inviter has the necessary authority to consent to an entry or search of the premises.\u201d Id. Given the situation he faced, including his knowledge that Mr. Green did not reside in the apartment, Deputy Davenport had a duty to make further inquiry before accepting that invitation.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=4935\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4935","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4935","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4935"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4935\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4935"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4935"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4935"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}