Defendant contended that the room in the apartment searched by the police by his roommate\u2019s consent was his. The facts presented to the police at the time, however, showed that the apartment was the roommate\u2019s and she had complete control over it. Therefore, the police were objectively reasonable relying on her apparent authority, even though she may not have had actual authority. Actual authority was not shown at the hearing, so the government wins on apparent authority. United States v. Dantzler, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31493 (E.D. N.Y. February 7, 2013).*<\/p>\n
Defendant\u2019s roommate called the police to tell them that he had child pornography on his computer left behind at her house. The FBI was already investigating him for child pornography. She let the police in to seize the computer. A search warrant was obtained for the computer, and defendant resisted complaining of a Franks violation of false information in the affidavit. The trial court found it negligent at best, but even removing the information did not undermine the probable cause for the warrant, so the search was good. Lamarre v. State<\/a>, 2013 Tex. App. LEXIS 2198 (Tex. App. \u2013 San Antonio March 1, 2013).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading