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

Criminal Law

: Fourth Amendment

No apparent authority over a shoe box

By John Wesley Hall, Jr.

The consenter had no apparent authority to consent to a search of defendant's shoe box because there was no common control. United States v. Taylor, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102085 (N.D. Ohio December 9, 2008): Here, as in Waller, Fultz, and Purcell, the court finds that Arnett lacked actual authority to consent to the search of Taylor's closed shoe box because: (1) none of Arnett's personal effects were contained in Taylor's shoe box; (2) the evidence shows that Taylor exercised exclusive control over the shoe box; and (3) the evidence shows that Taylor never gave Arnett permission to open the shoe box. The government's attempt to argue that Arnett had actual authority to consent to the search of the closed shoe box because some of Arnett's personal effects were stored in the closet where the shoe box was found is unavailing...continue to full post

Full post as published by Fourth Amendment on December 21, 2008 (boomark / email).