Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> Fourth Amendment

Criminal Law

: Fourth Amendment

D.Alaska: Defendant had guest standing, but not enough exclusivity to prevent third party consent over the room

By John Wesley Hall, Jr.

Defendant had guest standing but did not have sufficient exclusive control over the room he was staying in such that the principal occupant of the premises couldn’t consent to a search of the room. The consent came and went through the room during the day keeping his own stuff there. United States v. Noyola-Martinez, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18075 (D. Alaska February 22, 2011).* The undisputed evidence was that defendant consented to the search of his property, so his lawyer was not ineffective for not challenging it. Jones v. United States, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17264 (W.D. Mo. February 22, 2011).* The search warrant in this case was issued by a state judge on a state officer’s application. While the product of the search led to a federal indictment, it was a state search governed by state law so Rule 41 does not apply...continue to full post

Full post as published by Fourth Amendment on February 27, 2011 (boomark / email).