Mother could not consent to search of adult son\u2019s room. \u201cThis court is less persuaded by the presumption of control given to parents in Rith when the child at issue has been an adult for over two decades.\u201d \u201cBased on these facts they knew at the time, \u2018the agents could not reasonably have believed [Johnson] had authority to consent to this search.\u2019 United States v. Whitfield, 939 F.2d 1071, 1074, 291 U.S. App. D.C. 243 (D.C. Cir. 1991).\u201d United States v. Brown, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73277 (D.Mont. June 4, 2015). The codefendant friend, however, had no standing. United States v. Cislo, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73275 (D.Mont. June 4, 2015).<\/p>\n
Even though the Nevada wiretapping law hasn\u2019t been updated since 1973, its definition of \u201cwire communications\u201d includes cell phone calls. Sharpe v. State<\/a>, 2015 Nev. LEXIS 39 (June 4, 2015).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Mother could not consent to search of adult son\u2019s room. \u201cThis court is less persuaded by the presumption of control given to parents in Rith when the child at issue has been an adult for over two decades.\u201d \u201cBased on … Continue reading