search warrant question

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? North carolina


Doesnt a person of residence have to be the person to give the ok to search their own house? ;A friend that is over visiting cant give the ok for police to search someone elses house if the person that lives there is in custody can they?

=cjshortinc;2162158]

Doesnt a person of residence have to be the person to give the ok to search their own house?

Click to expand...

Not neccessarily.

;A friend that is over visiting cant give the ok for police to search someone elses house if the person that lives there is in custody can they?

Click to expand...

that would depend on the exact circumstances.

If you have a problem with evidence against you culled from the search, have your lawyer file a motion to supress the evidence based upon an illegal search.

cjshortinc said:

Doesnt a person of residence have to be the person to give the ok to search their own house? ;A friend that is over visiting cant give the ok for police to search someone elses house if the person that lives there is in custody can they?

Click to expand...

The title of your post indicates that a "search warrant" was involved. If so, then no consent, permission, or other form of acquiescence is needed - the warrant gives the police the permission to make entry.

- Carl

A legitimate occupant can give consent. So perhaps a friend over isn't, but a temporary roommate can. It doesn't have to be the owner.

I agree with Carl. Search Warrant and it's a done deal. If no one gives permission, the door gets kicked and they enter.

If a consent search, the key is apparent authority. In the scenario in the body of the message, unless the police had actual knowledge the person did not have any dominion or control over the premises, it would be reasonable to believe there was an apparent authority the person could consent to search.

tranquility said:

I agree with Carl. Search Warrant and it's a done deal. If no one gives permission, the door gets kicked and they enter.

If a consent search, the key is apparent authority. In the scenario in the body of the message, unless the police had actual knowledge the person did not have any dominion or control over the premises, it would be reasonable to believe there was an apparent authority the person could consent to search.

Click to expand...

You have to check with the law of North Carolina, though. The idea is that the constitution only protects against "unreasonable" searches and seizures - Supreme Court has held that if the police officer reasonably believed that the person giving consent was some sort of resident, the search is "reasonable." In practice, this is called the "good faith" exception.

Some states, however, such as New York, have explicitly rejected the "good faith" exception (NY did so on state constitutional grounds, I believe.) I don't know how North Carolina has dealt with the issue, if at all.

But, as the title of the thread implies, there was a search warrant. If no search warrant was issued, then some articulation of the circumstances of the entry would help in an evaluation.

- Carl

I would guess if the question actually involves a search warrant, the rest of the post would be irrelevent. The warrant allows the police to take any action listed on the warrant regardless of whom is at the residence.

any person at the residence could not, or would not be needed to approve a search. The warrant is what approves the search and whatever someone present said, felt, believed, or allowed at the time would be meaningless.