georgia
randolph
argued
november
decided
march
respondent
estranged
wife
gave
police
permission
search
marital
residence
items
drug
use
respondent
also
present
unequivocally
refused
give
consent
respondent
indicted
possession
cocaine
trial
denied
motion
suppress
evidence
products
warrantless
search
unauthorized
consent
georgia
appeals
reversed
affirming
state
held
consent
given
one
occupant
valid
face
refusal
another
physically
present
occupant
distinguished
matlock
recognized
permissibility
entry
made
consent
one
absence
held
circumstances
issue
physically
present
stated
refusal
permit
entry
renders
warrantless
entry
search
unreasonable
invalid
pp
fourth
amendment
recognizes
valid
warrantless
entry
search
premises
police
obtain
voluntary
consent
occupant
shares
reasonably
believed
share
common
authority
property
present
objects
matlock
supra
illinois
rodriguez
constant
element
assessing
fourth
amendment
reasonableness
cases
great
significance
given
widely
shared
social
expectations
influenced
property
law
controlled
rules
thus
matlock
holds
solitary
may
sometimes
consent
search
shared
premises
also
stands
proposition
reasonableness
search
significant
part
function
commonly
held
understandings
authority
may
exercise
ways
affect
interests
pp
matlock
example
common
understanding
readily
apparent
assumption
tenants
usually
make
common
authority
share
quarters
one
may
admit
visitors
consequence
guest
obnoxious
one
may
admitted
absence
matlock
placed
burden
police
eliminate
possibility
atypical
arrangements
absent
reason
doubt
regular
scheme
place
pp
took
step
toward
addressing
issue
held
minnesota
olson
overnight
houseguests
legitimate
expectation
privacy
temporary
quarters
customary
expectation
foundation
houseguest
fourth
amendment
rights
follow
inhabitant
shared
premises
may
claim
least
much
fact
naturally
even
stronger
claim
sensible
person
enter
shared
premises
based
one
occupant
invitation
fellow
tenant
said
stay
reticence
show
timidity
realization
people
living
together
disagree
use
common
quarters
resolution
must
come
voluntary
accommodation
appeals
authority
absent
recognized
hierarchy
parent
child
societal
legal
understanding
superior
inferior
pp
thus
disputed
invitation
without
gives
officer
better
claim
reasonableness
entering
officer
absent
consent
disputed
permission
match
fourth
amendment
central
value
respect
privacy
home
wilson
layne
state
countervailing
claims
add
outweigh
interest
bringing
criminal
activity
light
deflecting
suspicion
tell
police
knows
use
magistrate
getting
warrant
case
recognizes
limits
evidentiary
searches
bearing
capacity
police
invitation
one
tenant
enter
dwelling
another
tenant
objection
order
protect
resident
domestic
violence
though
alternatives
disputed
consent
always
open
door
search
evidence
police
suspect
inside
nothing
social
custom
reflection
private
law
argues
placing
higher
value
delving
private
premises
search
evidence
face
disputed
consent
requiring
clear
justification
government
searches
private
living
quarters
resident
objection
pp
two
loose
ends
first
matlock
explanation
constitutional
sufficiency
consent
enter
search
recognized
right
permit
inspection
right
right
admit
police
right
understood
property
law
instead
authority
recognized
customary
social
usage
substantial
bearing
fourth
amendment
reasonableness
specific
circumstances
question
whether
customary
social
understanding
accords
consenting
tenant
authority
prevail
objection
question
matlock
answer
second
fine
line
must
drawn
avoid
undercutting
matlock
defendant
though
present
squad
car
far
away
rodriguez
defendant
asleep
apartment
roused
knock
door
potential
defendant
objecting
fact
door
objects
permission
suffice
reasonable
search
whereas
potential
objector
nearby
part
threshold
colloquy
loses
formalism
justified
long
evidence
police
removed
potentially
objecting
tenant
entrance
specifically
avoid
possible
objection
practical
value
simple
clarity
complementary
rules
one
recognizing
permission
fellow
occupant
hand
according
dispositive
weight
fellow
occupant
expressed
contrary
indication
pp
respondent
refusal
clear
nothing
record
justifies
search
grounds
independent
wife
consent
pp
affirmed
souter
delivered
opinion
stevens
kennedy
ginsburg
breyer
joined
stevens
breyer
filed
concurring
opinions
roberts
filed
dissenting
opinion
scalia
joined
scalia
thomas
filed
dissenting
opinions
alito
took
part
consideration
decision
case
georgia
petitioner
scott
fitz
randolph
writ
certiorari
georgia
march
justice
souter
delivered
opinion
fourth
amendment
recognizes
valid
warrantless
entry
search
premises
police
obtain
voluntary
consent
occupant
shares
reasonably
believed
share
authority
area
common
later
objects
use
evidence
obtained
illinois
rodriguez
matlock
question
whether
evidentiary
seizure
likewise
lawful
permission
one
occupant
later
seeks
suppress
evidence
present
scene
expressly
refuses
consent
hold
circumstances
issue
physically
present
stated
refusal
permit
entry
prevails
rendering
warrantless
search
unreasonable
invalid
respondent
scott
randolph
wife
janet
separated
late
may
left
marital
residence
americus
georgia
went
stay
parents
canada
taking
son
belongings
july
returned
americus
house
child
though
record
reveal
whether
object
reconciliation
retrieval
remaining
possessions
morning
july
complained
police
domestic
dispute
husband
took
son
away
officers
reached
house
told
husband
cocaine
user
whose
habit
caused
financial
troubles
mentioned
marital
problems
said
son
recently
returned
stay
several
weeks
parents
shortly
police
arrived
scott
randolph
returned
explained
removed
child
neighbor
house
concern
wife
might
take
boy
country
denied
cocaine
use
countered
fact
wife
abused
drugs
alcohol
one
officers
sergeant
murray
went
janet
randolph
reclaim
child
returned
renewed
complaints
husband
drug
use
also
volunteered
drug
house
brief
petitioner
sergeant
murray
asked
scott
randolph
permission
search
house
unequivocally
refused
sergeant
turned
janet
randolph
consent
search
readily
gave
led
officer
upstairs
bedroom
identified
scott
sergeant
noticed
section
drinking
straw
powdery
residue
suspected
cocaine
left
house
get
evidence
bag
car
call
district
attorney
office
instructed
stop
search
apply
warrant
sergeant
murray
returned
house
janet
randolph
withdrew
consent
police
took
straw
police
station
along
randolphs
getting
search
warrant
returned
house
seized
evidence
drug
use
basis
scott
randolph
indicted
possession
cocaine
moved
suppress
evidence
products
warrantless
search
house
unauthorized
wife
consent
express
refusal
trial
denied
motion
ruling
janet
randolph
common
authority
consent
search
appeals
georgia
reversed
app
sustained
state
principally
ground
consent
conduct
warrantless
search
residence
given
one
occupant
valid
face
refusal
another
occupant
physically
present
scene
permit
warrantless
search
georgia
acknowledged
holding
matlock
consent
one
possesses
common
authority
premises
effects
valid
absent
nonconsenting
person
authority
shared
found
matlock
distinguishable
scott
randolph
absent
colloquy
police
relied
consent
make
search
state
stressed
officers
matlock
faced
physical
presence
joint
occupants
one
consenting
search
objecting
held
individual
chooses
live
another
assumes
risk
greater
inability
control
access
premises
absence
ibid
quoting
lafave
search
seizure
ed
hereinafter
lafave
contemplate
objection
request
search
commonly
shared
premises
made
overlooked
granted
certiorari
resolve
split
authority
whether
one
occupant
may
give
law
enforcement
effective
consent
search
shared
premises
present
refusal
permit
affirm
ii
fourth
amendment
rule
ordinarily
prohibiting
warrantless
entry
person
house
unreasonable
per
se
payton
new
york
coolidge
new
hampshire
one
jealously
carefully
drawn
exception
jones
recognizes
validity
searches
voluntary
consent
individual
possessing
authority
rodriguez
fellow
occupant
shares
common
authority
property
suspect
absent
matlock
supra
exception
consent
extends
even
entries
searches
permission
police
reasonably
erroneously
believe
possess
shared
authority
occupant
rodriguez
supra
none
cases
however
presented
fact
second
occupant
physically
present
refusing
permission
search
later
moving
suppress
evidence
significance
refusal
turns
underpinnings
consent
rule
recognized
since
matlock
defendant
case
arrested
yard
house
lived
graff
several
relatives
detained
squad
car
parked
nearby
police
went
door
graff
admitted
consented
search
house
explained
third
party
common
authority
synonymous
technical
property
interest
authority
justified
consent
rest
upon
law
property
attendant
historical
legal
refinement
rests
rather
mutual
use
property
persons
generally
joint
access
control
purposes
reasonable
recognize
right
permit
inspection
right
others
assumed
risk
one
number
might
permit
common
area
searched
citations
omitted
see
also
frazier
cupp
allowing
cousin
share
use
duffel
bag
leaving
house
suspect
must
taken
assumed
risk
cousin
allow
someone
else
look
inside
common
authority
counts
fourth
amendment
may
thus
broader
rights
accorded
property
law
see
rodriguez
supra
consent
sufficient
given
person
reasonably
appears
common
authority
fact
property
interest
premises
searched
although
limits
reflect
specialized
tenancy
arrangements
apparent
police
see
chapman
landlord
consent
search
tenant
home
constant
element
assessing
fourth
amendment
reasonableness
consent
cases
great
significance
given
widely
shared
social
expectations
naturally
enough
influenced
law
property
controlled
rules
cf
rakas
illinois
expectation
privacy
reasonable
source
outside
fourth
amendment
either
reference
concepts
real
personal
property
law
understandings
recognized
permitted
society
matlock
accordingly
holds
solitary
may
sometimes
consent
search
shared
premises
stands
proposition
reasonableness
search
significant
part
function
commonly
held
understanding
authority
may
exercise
ways
affect
interests
matlock
example
common
understanding
readily
apparent
someone
comes
door
domestic
dwelling
baby
hip
graff
shows
belongs
fact
standing
alone
enough
tell
law
enforcement
officer
visitor
occupies
place
along
others
probably
lives
subject
assumption
tenants
usually
make
common
authority
share
quarters
understand
one
may
admit
visitors
consequence
guest
obnoxious
one
may
nevertheless
admitted
absence
another
matlock
put
shared
tenancy
understood
include
assumption
risk
police
officers
entitled
rely
although
group
living
together
might
make
exceptional
arrangement
one
admit
guest
without
agreement
chance
eccentric
scheme
remote
expect
visitors
investigate
particular
household
rules
accepting
invitation
come
matlock
relied
usual
placed
burden
police
eliminate
possibility
atypical
arrangements
absence
reason
doubt
regular
scheme
place
also
easy
imagine
different
facts
known
common
authority
sensibly
suspected
person
scene
identifies
say
landlord
hotel
manager
calls
customary
understanding
authority
admit
guests
without
consent
current
occupant
see
chapman
supra
landlord
stoner
california
hotel
manager
tenant
ordinary
course
take
rented
premises
subject
formal
informal
agreement
landlord
may
let
visitors
dwelling
chapman
supra
hotel
guest
customarily
reason
expect
manager
allow
anyone
employees
room
see
stoner
supra
see
also
jeffers
hotel
staff
access
room
purposes
cleaning
maintenance
authority
admit
police
circumstances
neither
property
rights
common
contractual
arrangements
source
points
common
understanding
authority
admit
third
parties
generally
without
consent
person
occupying
premises
comes
searching
bureau
drawers
instances
even
person
clearly
belonging
premises
occupant
may
lack
perceived
authority
consent
child
eight
might
well
considered
power
consent
police
crossing
threshold
part
house
caller
pollster
salesman
might
well
admitted
lafave
ed
one
reasonably
expect
child
position
authorize
anyone
rummage
parents
bedroom
although
dealt
directly
reasonableness
police
entry
reliance
consent
one
occupant
subject
immediate
challenge
another
took
step
toward
issue
earlier
case
dealing
fourth
amendment
rights
social
guest
arrested
premises
police
entered
without
warrant
benefit
exception
warrant
requirement
minnesota
olson
held
overnight
houseguests
legitimate
expectation
privacy
temporary
quarters
unlikely
host
admit
someone
wants
see
meet
guest
objection
guest
customary
expectation
courtesy
deference
foundation
fourth
amendment
rights
houseguest
presumably
follow
inhabitant
shared
premises
may
claim
least
much
turns
naturally
even
stronger
claim
begin
fair
say
caller
standing
door
shared
premises
confidence
one
occupant
invitation
sufficiently
good
reason
enter
fellow
tenant
stood
saying
stay
without
good
reason
sensible
person
go
inside
conditions
fear
safety
occupant
issuing
invitation
someone
else
inside
thought
justify
entry
justification
personal
risk
threats
life
limb
disputed
visitor
reticence
without
good
reason
show
timidity
realization
people
living
together
disagree
use
common
quarters
resolution
must
come
voluntary
accommodation
appeals
authority
unless
people
living
together
fall
within
recognized
hierarchy
like
household
parent
child
barracks
housing
military
personnel
different
grades
societal
understanding
superior
inferior
fact
reflected
standard
formulation
domestic
property
law
ach
cotenant
right
use
enjoy
entire
property
sole
owner
limited
right
cotenants
powell
powell
real
property
wolf
ed
want
recognized
superior
authority
among
disagreeing
tenants
also
reflected
law
response
disagreements
resolved
law
ask
better
side
conflict
simply
provides
right
even
unreasonable
obtain
decree
partitioning
property
relationship
one
terminating
relationship
see
tiffany
real
property
pp
ed
cum
decree
partition
answer
disagreement
among
rental
tenants
situation
resembles
lacking
benefit
understanding
one
rental
superior
claim
control
use
quarters
occupy
together
sum
common
understanding
one
generally
right
authority
prevail
express
wishes
another
whether
issue
color
curtains
invitations
outsiders
since
wishing
open
door
third
party
recognized
authority
law
social
practice
prevail
present
objecting
disputed
invitation
without
gives
police
officer
better
claim
reasonableness
entering
officer
absence
consent
accordingly
balancing
competing
individual
governmental
interests
entailed
bar
unreasonable
searches
camara
municipal
city
county
san
francisco
cooperative
occupant
invitation
adds
nothing
government
side
counter
force
objecting
individual
claim
security
government
intrusion
dwelling
place
since
hold
principle
respect
privacy
home
wilson
layne
beyond
dispute
home
entitled
special
protection
center
private
lives
people
minnesota
carter
kennedy
concurring
lived
whole
national
history
understanding
ancient
adage
man
home
castle
point
poorest
man
may
cottage
bid
defiance
forces
crown
miller
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
disputed
permission
thus
match
central
value
fourth
amendment
state
countervailing
claims
add
outweigh
yes
recognize
consenting
tenant
interest
citizen
bringing
criminal
activity
light
see
coolidge
part
policy
underlying
fourth
amendmen
discourage
citizens
aiding
utmost
ability
apprehension
criminals
understand
legitimate
siding
police
deflect
suspicion
raised
sharing
quarters
criminal
see
lafave
risk
convicted
possession
drugs
one
knows
present
tried
get
occupant
remove
means
insignificant
cf
schneckloth
evidence
obtained
pursuant
consent
search
may
insure
wholly
innocent
person
wrongly
charged
criminal
offense
society
often
benefit
interests
without
relying
theory
consent
ignores
inhabitant
refusal
allow
warrantless
search
acting
initiative
may
able
deliver
evidence
police
coolidge
supra
suspect
wife
retrieved
guns
couple
house
turned
police
tell
police
knows
use
magistrate
getting
reliance
information
instead
disputed
consent
accords
law
general
partiality
toward
police
action
taken
warrant
searches
seizures
without
one
ventresca
informed
deliberate
determinations
magistrates
empowered
issue
warrants
searches
seizures
permissible
constitution
preferred
hurried
action
officers
lefkowitz
established
policy
fourth
amendment
law
undermined
principal
dissent
claim
shields
spousal
abusers
violent
refuse
allow
police
enter
dwelling
victims
ask
police
help
post
opinion
roberts
hereinafter
dissent
dissent
exaggerates
violence
home
recognize
domestic
abuse
serious
problem
see
dept
justice
national
institute
justice
tjaden
thoennes
full
report
prevalence
incidence
consequence
violence
women
noting
million
women
million
men
course
lifetimes
victims
abuse
dept
health
human
services
centers
disease
control
prevention
national
center
injury
prevention
control
costs
intimate
partner
violence
women
finding
nearly
million
intimate
partner
victimizations
result
close
million
injuries
deaths
occur
among
women
year
dept
justice
bureau
justice
statistics
crime
data
brief
rennison
intimate
partner
violence
noting
intimate
partner
violence
made
violent
crime
women
see
also
becker
politics
women
wrongs
bill
rights
bicentennial
perspective
chi
rev
noting
women
may
feel
physical
insecurity
homes
result
abuse
domestic
partners
case
bearing
capacity
police
protect
domestic
victims
dissent
argument
rests
failure
distinguish
two
different
issues
police
may
enter
without
committing
trespass
police
may
enter
search
evidence
question
raised
reasonably
authority
police
enter
dwelling
protect
resident
domestic
violence
long
good
reason
believe
threat
exists
silly
suggest
police
commit
tort
entering
say
give
complaining
tenant
opportunity
collect
belongings
get
safely
determine
whether
violence
threat
violence
occurred
soon
occur
however
much
spouse
objected
since
police
lawfully
premises
question
seize
evidence
plain
view
take
action
supported
consequent
probable
cause
see
texas
brown
plurality
opinion
thus
question
whether
police
might
lawfully
enter
objection
order
provide
protection
might
reasonable
easily
answered
yes
see
lafave
ven
two
persons
quite
clearly
equal
rights
place
two
individuals
sharing
apartment
equal
basis
may
nonetheless
sometimes
exist
basis
giving
greater
recognition
interests
one
defendant
victimized
emergency
nature
situation
consent
validate
warrantless
search
despite
defendant
objections
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
third
omission
original
undoubted
right
police
enter
order
protect
victim
however
nothing
question
case
whether
search
consent
one
good
another
standing
door
expressly
refusing
none
cases
cited
dissent
support
improbable
view
recognizing
limits
merely
evidentiary
searches
compromise
capacity
protect
fearful
occupant
circumstances
cases
danger
fearful
occupant
kept
behind
closed
door
house
simply
abusive
tenant
refuses
consent
search
see
donlin
victimized
individual
already
outside
apartment
police
arrived
intents
purposes
within
protective
custody
law
enforcement
officers
hendrix
cadc
per
curiam
even
consent
threatened
justify
warrantless
search
police
entry
nevertheless
allowable
grounds
people
sanders
victimized
individual
gave
away
home
present
time
police
visit
alternatively
exigent
circumstances
existed
satisfy
warrantless
exception
brandon
state
alaska
app
victimized
individual
consented
away
home
present
time
police
visit
davis
immediate
harm
extinguished
husband
order
ed
wife
home
dissent
red
herring
aside
know
course
alternatives
disputed
consent
always
open
door
search
evidence
police
suspect
inside
consenting
tenant
may
simply
disclose
enough
information
information
factual
enough
add
showing
probable
cause
may
exigency
justify
fast
action
nothing
social
custom
reflection
private
law
argues
placing
higher
value
delving
private
premises
search
evidence
face
disputed
consent
requiring
clear
justification
government
searches
private
living
quarters
resident
objection
therefore
hold
warrantless
search
shared
dwelling
evidence
express
refusal
consent
physically
present
resident
justified
reasonable
basis
consent
given
police
another
two
loose
ends
first
explanation
given
matlock
constitutional
sufficiency
consent
enter
search
rests
mutual
use
property
persons
generally
joint
access
control
purposes
reasonable
recognize
right
permit
inspection
right
matlock
giving
permission
right
right
eliminated
another
tenant
objection
answer
appears
quoted
statement
taken
right
admit
police
matlock
refers
enduring
enforceable
ownership
right
understood
private
law
property
instead
authority
recognized
customary
social
usage
substantial
bearing
fourth
amendment
reasonableness
specific
circumstances
thus
ask
whether
consenting
tenant
right
admit
police
physically
present
fellow
tenant
objects
question
whether
property
right
may
divested
mere
objection
another
rather
question
whether
customary
social
understanding
accords
consenting
tenant
authority
powerful
enough
prevail
objection
matlock
purport
answer
question
point
made
clear
another
statement
dissent
quote
described
consent
good
absent
nonconsenting
resident
second
loose
end
significance
matlock
rodriguez
today
decision
although
matlock
defendant
present
opportunity
object
squad
car
far
away
rodriguez
defendant
actually
asleep
apartment
police
might
roused
knock
door
entered
consent
apparent
cases
undercut
today
holding
admit
drawing
fine
line
potential
defendant
objecting
fact
door
objects
permission
suffice
reasonable
search
whereas
potential
objector
nearby
invited
take
part
threshold
colloquy
loses
line
draw
think
formalism
justified
long
evidence
police
removed
potentially
objecting
tenant
entrance
sake
avoiding
possible
objection
practical
value
simple
clarity
complementary
rules
one
recognizing
permission
fellow
occupant
hand
according
dispositive
weight
fellow
occupant
contrary
indication
expresses
reason
rodriguez
held
unjustifiably
impractical
require
police
take
affirmative
steps
confirm
actual
authority
consenting
individual
whose
authority
apparent
think
needlessly
limit
capacity
police
respond
ostensibly
legitimate
opportunities
field
hold
reasonableness
required
police
take
affirmative
steps
find
potentially
objecting
acting
permission
already
received
ready
reason
believe
efforts
invite
refusal
make
difference
many
cases
whereas
every
consent
case
turn
test
adequacy
police
efforts
consult
potential
objector
better
accept
formalism
distinguishing
matlock
case
impose
requirement
field
courtroom
apparent
systemic
justification
pragmatic
decision
accept
simplicity
line
moreover
supported
substantial
number
instances
suspects
asked
permission
search
actually
albeit
imprudently
fact
undercuts
argument
police
try
locate
suspected
inhabitant
denial
consent
foregone
conclusion
iii
case
invites
straightforward
application
rule
physically
present
inhabitant
express
refusal
consent
police
search
dispositive
regardless
consent
fellow
occupant
scott
randolph
refusal
clear
nothing
record
justifies
search
grounds
independent
janet
randolph
consent
state
argue
gave
indication
police
need
protection
inside
house
might
justified
entry
portion
premises
police
found
powdery
straw
lawfully
seized
used
attempting
establish
probable
cause
warrant
issued
later
state
claim
entry
search
upheld
rubric
exigent
circumstances
owing
apprehension
police
officers
scott
randolph
destroy
evidence
drug
use
warrant
obtained
judgment
georgia
therefore
affirmed
ordered
justice
alito
took
part
consideration
decision
case
georgia
petitioner
scott
fitz
randolph
writ
certiorari
georgia
march
justice
stevens
concurring
study
history
purpose
ascertaining
original
understanding
constitutional
provisions
much
like
study
legislative
history
purpose
ascertaining
intent
lawmakers
enact
statutes
situations
facts
uncovered
study
usually
relevant
necessarily
dispositive
case
illustrates
even
dedicated
adherent
approach
constitutional
interpretation
places
primary
reliance
search
original
understanding
recognize
relevance
changes
society
least
since
settled
absence
exigent
circumstances
government
agent
right
enter
house
castle
unless
authorized
valid
warrant
see
semayne
case
eng
every
occupant
home
right
protected
common
law
centuries
fourth
amendment
since
refuse
entry
occupant
gives
consent
enter
waiving
valuable
constitutional
right
sure
waiver
voluntary
sound
practice
practice
justices
thought
necessary
make
waiver
officer
advise
occupant
issue
case
relates
content
advice
officer
provide
met
door
man
woman
apparently
joint
tenants
joint
owners
property
century
fourth
amendment
adopted
advice
quite
different
appropriate
today
given
dramatic
differences
property
rights
husband
far
lesser
rights
wife
consent
husband
matter
whether
master
house
consented
objected
decision
control
thus
original
understanding
govern
outcome
case
search
clearly
invalid
husband
consent
history
however
dispositive
clear
matter
constitutional
law
male
female
equal
partners
reed
reed
today
world
advice
officer
properly
give
make
clear
partners
constitutional
right
may
independently
assert
waive
assuming
spouses
competent
neither
one
master
possessing
power
override
constitutional
right
deny
entry
castle
observations
join
opinion
georgia
petitioner
scott
fitz
randolph
writ
certiorari
georgia
march
justice
breyer
concurring
fourth
amendment
law
forced
us
choose
two
rules
rule
always
found
one
tenant
consent
sufficient
justify
search
without
warrant
rule
never
believe
choose
first
chief
justice
dissent
points
rule
permitting
searches
serve
important
law
enforcement
needs
example
domestic
abuse
cases
consenting
party
joint
tenancy
diminishes
objecting
party
reasonable
expectation
privacy
fourth
amendment
insist
upon
rules
rather
recognizes
single
set
legal
rules
capture
ever
changing
complexity
human
life
consequently
uses
general
terms
unreasonable
searches
seizures
continuously
emphasized
easonableness
measured
examining
totality
circumstances
ohio
robinette
see
also
illinois
wardlow
stevens
concurring
part
dissenting
part
florida
bostick
michigan
chesternut
florida
royer
plurality
opinion
circumstances
include
following
search
issue
search
solely
evidence
objecting
party
present
made
objection
known
clearly
directly
officers
seeking
enter
house
officers
justify
search
grounds
possible
evidence
destruction
cf
thornton
skinner
railway
labor
executives
schmerber
california
far
record
reveals
officers
might
easily
secured
premises
sought
warrant
permitting
enter
see
illinois
mcarthur
thus
totality
circumstances
present
suffice
justify
abandoning
fourth
amendment
traditional
hostility
police
entry
home
without
warrant
stress
totality
circumstances
however
circumstances
change
significantly
result
opinion
apply
objector
present
object
ing
ante
moreover
risk
ongoing
crime
exigent
circumstance
make
critical
difference
consider
example
instances
domestic
abuse
see
ante
family
disturbance
calls
constitute
largest
single
category
calls
received
police
departments
year
mederer
gelles
compassion
control
intervention
cases
wife
abuse
journal
interpersonal
violence
mar
emphasis
deleted
see
also
office
attorney
general
california
criminal
justice
statistics
center
domestic
violence
related
calls
assistance
county
year
http
visited
mar
available
clerk
case
file
providing
data
showing
california
police
received
average
domestic
violence
related
calls
year
cessato
defenders
domestic
abuse
washington
post
district
columbia
police
report
almost
half
roughly
violent
crime
calls
received
involved
domestic
violence
zorza
women
battering
high
costs
state
law
clearinghouse
review
special
issue
police
time
spent
responding
domestic
disturbance
calls
law
enforcement
officers
must
able
respond
effectively
confronted
possibility
abuse
possible
abuse
victim
invites
responding
officer
enter
home
consents
officer
entry
request
invitation
consent
reflect
victim
fear
left
alone
abuser
also
indicate
availability
evidence
form
immediate
willingness
speak
might
otherwise
exist
context
invitation
consent
provide
special
reason
immediate
rather
later
police
entry
entry
following
invitation
consent
one
party
ordinarily
reasonable
even
face
direct
objection
contrary
chief
justice
suggestion
post
today
decision
adversely
affect
ordinary
law
enforcement
practices
given
nature
holding
understandings
join
holding
opinion
georgia
petitioner
scott
fitz
randolph
writ
certiorari
georgia
march
chief
justice
roberts
justice
scalia
joins
dissenting
creates
constitutional
law
surmising
typical
social
guest
encounters
entirely
atypical
situation
rule
majority
fashions
implement
high
office
fourth
amendment
protect
privacy
instead
provides
protection
random
happenstance
basis
protecting
example
happens
front
door
occupant
consents
search
one
napping
watching
television
next
room
cost
affording
random
protection
great
demonstrated
recurring
cases
abused
spouses
seek
authorize
police
entry
home
share
nonconsenting
abuser
correct
approach
question
presented
clearly
mapped
precedents
fourth
amendment
protects
privacy
individual
shares
information
papers
places
another
assumes
risk
person
turn
share
access
information
papers
places
government
individual
shared
illegal
plans
incriminating
documents
another
interpose
objection
person
turns
information
government
individual
happens
present
time
someone
shares
place
another
interpose
objection
person
decides
grant
access
police
simply
objecting
individual
happens
present
warrantless
search
reasonable
police
obtain
voluntary
consent
person
authorized
give
assumed
risk
one
number
might
permit
common
area
searched
matlock
randolph
walk
upstairs
come
turn
husband
cocaine
straw
police
consent
police
entry
search
home
illinois
rodriguez
stated
hat
person
assured
fourth
amendment
government
search
house
occur
unless
consents
search
occur
one
element
make
warrantless
government
search
home
voluntary
consent
schneckloth
bustamonte
proof
voluntary
consent
limited
proof
consent
given
defendant
government
may
show
permission
search
obtained
third
party
possessed
common
authority
sufficient
relationship
premises
matlock
supra
today
opinion
creates
exception
otherwise
clear
rule
consent
search
unreasonable
therefore
constitutionally
impermissible
evidence
obtained
present
objected
entry
search
exception
based
majority
describes
widely
shared
social
expectations
people
living
together
disagree
use
common
quarters
resolution
must
come
voluntary
accommodation
ante
fundamental
predicate
majority
analysis
gets
us
nowhere
objecting
cotenant
accede
consenting
cotenant
wishes
way
around
majority
assumption
voluntary
accommodation
simply
leads
common
stalemate
two
gentlemen
insisting
enter
room
first
nevertheless
majority
confident
assuming
confident
enough
incorporate
assumption
constitution
invited
social
guest
arrives
door
shared
residence
greeted
disagreeable
shouting
simply
go
away
ante
observes
sensible
person
go
inside
conditions
ante
concludes
inviting
authority
insist
getting
way
wishes
ante
seems
equally
accurate
say
based
majority
conclusion
one
right
prevail
express
wishes
objector
authority
insist
getting
way
wish
guest
admitted
fact
wide
variety
differing
social
situations
readily
imagined
giving
rise
quite
different
social
expectations
relative
good
friend
one
two
feuding
roommates
might
well
enter
apartment
objection
roommate
reason
invitee
appeared
door
also
affects
expectations
guest
came
celebrate
occupant
birthday
one
traveled
distance
particular
reason
might
readily
turn
away
simply
roommate
objection
nature
place
also
pertinent
invitees
may
react
one
way
feuding
roommates
share
one
room
differently
common
areas
objecting
roommate
readily
expected
absent
altering
numbers
might
well
change
social
expectations
invitees
might
enter
two
three
encourage
one
dissenter
possible
scenarios
limitless
slight
variations
fact
pattern
yield
vastly
different
expectations
whether
invitee
might
expected
enter
go
away
shifting
expectations
promising
foundation
ground
constitutional
rule
particularly
majority
support
basic
assumption
invited
guest
encountering
two
disagreeing
flee
beyond
hunch
people
typically
act
atypical
situation
fact
looked
expectations
decide
questions
consent
fourth
amendment
determine
search
occurred
whether
particular
person
standing
object
search
latter
inquiries
ask
whether
person
subjective
expectation
privacy
particular
place
whether
expectation
one
society
prepared
recognize
katz
harlan
concurring
see
minnesota
olson
extending
katz
test
standing
inquiry
social
expectations
concept
applied
questions
arising
fourth
amendment
least
issues
consent
criminal
might
strong
expectation
longtime
confidant
allow
government
listen
private
conversations
however
profound
shock
might
upon
betrayal
government
monitoring
confidant
consent
reasonable
fourth
amendment
see
white
majority
suggests
widely
shared
social
expectations
constant
element
assessing
fourth
amendment
reasonableness
ante
citing
rakas
illinois
case
fourth
amendment
precedents
majority
cites
refer
instead
legitimate
expectation
privacy
ibid
emphasis
added
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
whatever
social
expectation
majority
seeks
protect
one
privacy
predicate
giving
rise
question
cases
shared
information
papers
containers
places
privacy
shared
another
common
social
expectations
may
well
person
turn
share
shared
another
including
police
risk
take
sharing
two
friends
share
locker
one
keeps
contraband
inside
might
trust
friend
let
others
look
inside
sharing
private
space
privacy
already
frustrated
respect
lockermate
jacobsen
two
roommates
share
computer
one
keeps
pirated
software
shared
drive
might
assume
roommate
inform
government
person
given
privacy
respect
roommate
saving
software
shared
computer
wide
variety
often
subtle
social
conventions
may
shape
expectations
act
another
shares
us
otherwise
private
conventions
go
variety
labels
courtesy
good
manners
custom
protocol
even
honor
among
thieves
constitution
however
protects
privacy
privacy
shared
shared
information
documents
places
remain
private
discretion
confidant
ii
cases
reflect
understanding
white
held
one
party
conversation
consent
government
eavesdropping
statements
made
party
admissible
trial
rule
based
privacy
inescapably
one
contemplating
illegal
activities
must
realize
risk
companions
may
reporting
police
doubts
allays
risks
doubt
risk
ibid
applied
analysis
objects
places
well
frazier
cupp
duffel
bag
used
jointly
two
cousins
held
consent
one
effective
result
seizure
evidence
used
allowing
cousin
use
bag
leaving
house
defendant
must
taken
assumed
risk
cousin
allow
someone
else
look
inside
ibid
explained
jacobsen
supra
well
settled
individual
reveals
private
information
another
assumes
risk
confidant
reveal
information
authorities
occurs
fourth
amendment
prohibit
governmental
use
information
frustration
original
expectation
privacy
occurs
fourth
amendment
prohibit
governmental
use
nonprivate
information
held
repeatedly
fourth
amendment
prohibit
obtaining
information
revealed
third
party
conveyed
government
authorities
even
information
revealed
assumption
used
limited
purpose
confidence
placed
third
party
betrayed
quoting
miller
analysis
applies
question
whether
privacy
compromised
share
common
living
space
person
keeps
contraband
common
areas
home
runs
risk
deliver
contraband
police
coolidge
new
hampshire
coolidge
retrieved
four
husband
guns
clothes
wearing
previous
night
handed
police
held
items
properly
admitted
trial
coolidge
accord
produced
guns
clothes
inspection
incumbent
police
stop
avert
eyes
even
private
relationships
observable
actions
possessions
private
discretion
around
us
husband
request
wife
tell
jury
contraband
observed
home
illegal
activity
bore
witness
decides
whether
invoke
testimonial
marital
privilege
trammel
trammel
noted
former
rule
prohibiting
wife
testifying
husband
observable
wrongdoing
say
goes
far
beyond
making
man
house
castle
permits
person
convert
house
den
thieves
quoting
bentham
rationale
judicial
evidence
basis
evaluating
physical
searches
shared
space
manner
different
evaluated
privacy
interests
foregoing
cases
fact
proceeded
along
lines
considering
searches
matlock
police
arrested
defendant
front
yard
house
placed
squad
car
obtained
permission
graff
search
shared
bedroom
evidence
matlock
bank
robbery
police
certainly
assumed
matlock
objected
consulted
sat
handcuffed
squad
car
outside
rodriguez
miss
fischer
offered
facilitate
arrest
sleeping
boyfriend
admitting
police
apartment
apparently
shared
police
might
noted
entry
undoubtedly
contrary
rodriguez
social
expectations
yet
searches
reasonable
fourth
amendment
graff
authority
miss
fischer
apparent
authority
admit
others
areas
exercised
control
despite
almost
certain
wishes
present
common
thread
decisions
upholding
searches
conducted
pursuant
consent
understanding
person
assume
risk
access
control
shared
property
might
consent
search
matlock
matlock
explained
assumption
risk
derived
third
party
joint
access
control
purposes
shared
property
ibid
concluded
shared
use
property
makes
reasonable
recognize
right
permit
inspection
right
ibid
sense
risk
assumed
joint
occupant
comparable
risk
assumed
one
reveals
private
information
another
person
incriminating
information
keep
private
face
request
police
share
right
fifth
amendment
person
occupies
house
incriminating
information
keep
information
private
face
request
police
search
house
right
fourth
amendment
shares
information
house
another
grant
access
police
extent
person
wants
ensure
possessions
subject
consent
search
due
consent
free
place
items
area
others
share
access
control
private
room
locked
suitcase
bed
randolph
acknowledged
distinction
motion
suppress
differentiated
law
office
rest
randolph
house
describing
area
solely
control
dominion
app
common
area
however
joint
access
control
may
consent
entry
search
matlock
supra
emphasizing
objector
presence
noting
occupant
understanding
obnoxious
guests
might
admitted
one
absence
ante
majority
appears
resurrect
agency
theory
consent
suggested
early
cases
see
stoner
california
stating
hotel
clerk
consent
search
guest
room
guest
waived
rights
word
deed
either
directly
agent
chapman
agency
theory
belied
facts
matlock
rodriguez
defendants
present
simply
asked
consent
made
clear
cases
authority
consent
rested
absent
occupant
delegation
choice
agent
consenting
joint
access
control
property
matlock
supra
see
rodriguez
supra
mcalpine
gency
analysis
put
rest
reasoning
matlock
law
acknowledges
although
might
expect
friends
family
admit
government
common
areas
sharing
space
entails
risk
person
assumes
risk
might
report
illegal
activity
deliver
contraband
government
might
consent
search
areas
access
control
see
karo
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
finding
relatively
easy
case
two
persons
share
identical
overlapping
privacy
interests
particular
place
container
conversation
share
power
surrender
privacy
third
party
iii
majority
rule
follows
warrantless
search
shared
dwelling
evidence
express
refusal
consent
physically
present
resident
justified
reasonable
basis
consent
given
police
another
resident
ante
source
majority
rule
privacy
interest
protects
reasonably
described
interest
protected
happens
absent
police
arrive
backyard
gardening
asleep
next
room
listening
music
earphones
hears
knock
door
rule
random
application
confirms
bears
real
relation
privacy
protected
fourth
amendment
majority
rule
protects
much
privacy
good
luck
happens
present
door
police
arrive
usually
development
fourth
amendment
jurisprudence
leads
arbitrary
lines
take
signal
rules
need
rethought
see
california
acevedo
embrace
rule
outset
sponsors
appreciate
result
drawing
fine
formalistic
lines
see
ante
rather
draw
random
happenstance
lines
pretend
constitution
decreed
reasonable
approach
adopt
rule
acknowledging
shared
living
space
entails
limited
yielding
privacy
others
law
historically
permits
yielded
privacy
turn
cooperate
government
rule
flows
naturally
cases
concerning
fourth
amendment
reasonableness
logically
grounded
concept
privacy
underlying
amendment
scope
majority
rule
arbitrary
obscure
well
majority
repeats
several
times
present
refusal
permit
entry
renders
search
unreasonable
invalid
ante
implies
entry
search
reasonable
someone
else
presumably
consenting
absent
normal
fourth
amendment
rule
items
discovered
plain
view
admissible
officers
legitimately
premises
entry
search
reasonable
randolph
based
consent
clear
cocaine
straw
admissible
randolph
discovered
plain
view
legitimate
search
randolph
majority
differentiation
entry
focused
discovering
whether
domestic
violence
occurred
consequent
authority
seize
items
plain
view
entry
focused
searching
evidence
crime
equally
puzzling
see
ante
rejected
subjective
motivations
police
officers
assessing
fourth
amendment
questions
see
whren
good
reason
police
need
particular
reason
ask
consent
search
whether
signs
domestic
violence
evidence
drug
possession
majority
rule
protects
something
random
consequences
particularly
severe
question
presented
often
arises
innocent
cotenants
seek
disassociate
protect
ongoing
criminal
activity
see
hendrix
cadc
wife
asked
police
get
baby
take
shotgun
house
people
cosme
woman
asked
police
remove
cocaine
gun
shared
closet
botsch
majority
rule
many
cases
consenting
wish
police
enter
overridden
objection
another
present
majority
imagine
happen
case
consenting
concerned
criminal
activity
door
clicks
shut
objecting
may
pause
briefly
decide
whether
destroy
evidence
wrongdoing
inflict
retribution
consenting
first
little
doubt
attend
short
order
answer
say
consenting
depart
police
remember
home
presence
allowed
object
may
also
prevent
consenting
urging
police
enter
perhaps
serious
consequence
majority
rule
operation
domestic
abuse
situations
context
present
question
often
arises
see
rodriguez
donlin
hendrix
supra
people
sanders
en
banc
brandon
state
alaska
app
people
living
together
might
typically
accommodating
wishes
cotenants
requests
police
assistance
may
well
come
coinhabitants
disagreement
concludes
sensible
person
go
inside
face
disputed
consent
ante
consenting
cotenant
thus
recognized
authority
insist
guest
admission
ante
police
officer
better
claim
reasonableness
entering
officer
absence
consent
ibid
police
officer
superior
claim
enter
obvious
randolph
invite
police
join
dessert
coffee
officer
precise
purpose
knocking
door
assist
dispute
randolphs
one
randolph
felt
need
protective
presence
police
majority
rule
apparently
forbids
police
entering
assist
domestic
dispute
abuser
whose
behavior
prompted
request
police
assistance
majority
acknowledges
concerns
dismisses
ground
rule
expected
give
rise
exigent
situations
police
rely
exigent
circumstances
exception
justify
entry
ante
strange
way
justify
rule
fact
alternative
justifications
entry
might
arise
show
entry
pursuant
consent
unreasonable
addition
far
clear
exception
emergency
entries
suffices
protect
safety
occupants
domestic
disputes
see
davis
finding
exigent
circumstances
justifying
entry
police
responded
report
domestic
abuse
officers
heard
noise
upon
arrival
defendant
told
officers
wife
town
wife
appeared
door
seemingly
unharmed
resisted
husband
efforts
close
door
rather
give
effect
consenting
spouse
authority
permit
entry
house
avoid
situations
majority
alters
established
fourth
amendment
rules
defend
giving
veto
power
objecting
spouse
response
concern
police
might
turned
away
rule
entry
justified
based
exigency
majority
creates
new
rule
good
reason
enter
coupled
one
occupant
consent
ensure
police
officer
lawfully
premises
ante
support
consent
plus
good
reason
rule
majority
cites
treatise
refers
emergency
entries
ante
citing
lafave
search
seizure
ed
sake
defending
concedes
fine
formalistic
lines
majority
spins
entirely
new
framework
analyzing
exigent
circumstances
police
may
enter
good
reason
believe
violence
threat
violence
occurred
soon
occur
ante
apparently
key
factor
allowing
entry
good
reason
short
exigency
consent
one
majority
finds
inadequate
first
place
majority
analysis
alters
great
deal
established
fourth
amendment
law
majority
imports
concept
social
expectations
previously
used
determine
search
occurred
whether
particular
person
standing
object
search
questions
consent
ante
determine
whether
entry
search
reasonable
majority
considers
police
officer
subjective
motive
asking
consent
otherwise
refrained
assessing
fourth
amendment
questions
ante
majority
creates
new
exception
warrant
requirement
justify
warrantless
entry
short
exigency
potential
domestic
abuse
situations
ibid
considering
majority
rule
solely
concerned
protecting
person
happens
present
door
police
officer
asks
consent
search
one
asleep
next
room
backyard
gardening
majority
taken
great
deal
pain
altering
fourth
amendment
doctrine
precious
little
gain
privacy
perhaps
one
day
consequences
majority
analytic
approach
become
clearer
today
opinion
treated
way
majority
treats
opinions
matlock
rodriguez
loose
end
tied
ante
one
concurring
opinions
choose
rule
cotenant
consent
valid
rule
choose
former
ante
opinion
breyer
concurrence
advises
however
single
set
legal
rules
capture
ever
changing
complexity
human
life
joins
becomes
majority
opinion
iven
nature
holding
ante
majority
establishes
terms
rule
physically
present
inhabitant
express
refusal
consent
police
search
dispositive
regardless
consent
fellow
occupant
ante
emphases
added
concurrence
joins
apparent
understandin
majority
rule
rule
simply
holding
ante
opinion
breyer
end
result
complete
lack
practical
guidance
police
field
let
alone
lower
courts
consent
cases
recognized
person
shares
common
areas
others
assume
risk
one
number
might
permit
common
area
searched
matlock
majority
reminds
us
high
tones
man
home
castle
ante
even
majority
rule
castle
happens
absent
asleep
keep
otherwise
engaged
constable
arrives
gate
castle
course
castle
wants
consent
entry
objects
rather
constitutionalize
arbitrary
rule
acknowledge
decision
share
private
place
like
decision
share
secret
confidential
document
necessarily
entails
risk
share
may
turn
choose
share
protection
reasons
police
respectfully
dissent
georgia
petitioner
scott
fitz
randolph
writ
certiorari
georgia
march
justice
scalia
dissenting
join
dissent
chief
justice
add
words
response
justice
stevens
concurrence
clear
justice
stevens
time
fourth
amendment
adopted
police
officer
enter
married
woman
home
objection
enter
consent
clear
answers
questions
depended
solely
owned
house
entirely
clear
however
matter
depend
solely
property
rights
alteration
property
rights
also
produce
alteration
fourth
amendment
outcome
without
altering
fourth
amendment
justice
stevens
attempted
critique
originalism
confuses
original
import
fourth
amendment
background
sources
law
amendment
original
meaning
referred
date
ratification
well
century
violation
amendment
tied
trespass
see
kyllo
see
also
california
acevedo
scalia
concurring
judgment
basis
connection
someone
power
license
search
house
private
party
authorize
police
search
see
restatement
torts
comment
see
also
williams
howard
fennemore
armstrong
del
super
issue
give
consent
generally
depended
turn
historical
legal
refinements
property
law
matlock
property
law
developed
individuals
previously
authorize
search
might
become
able
grant
consent
might
longer
power
changes
law
property
fourth
amendment
referred
alter
amendment
meaning
anyone
capable
authorizing
search
private
party
consent
warrantless
search
police
nothing
new
surprising
proposition
unchanging
constitution
refers
bodies
law
might
change
fifth
amendment
provides
instance
private
property
shall
taken
public
use
without
compensation
purport
define
property
rights
consistently
held
existence
property
interest
determined
reference
rules
understandings
stem
independent
source
state
law
phillips
washington
legal
foundation
quoting
board
regents
state
colleges
roth
true
fourteenth
amendment
due
process
clause
protection
property
see
castle
rock
gonzales
reference
changeable
law
presents
problem
originalist
one
supposes
meaning
constitution
changes
expand
contract
property
rights
indeed
true
therefore
wife
authorize
search
husband
house
fact
current
property
law
provides
otherwise
troublesome
originalist
well
established
fact
state
must
compensate
takings
even
property
rights
exist
time
founding
event
justice
stevens
panegyric
equal
rights
women
modern
property
law
support
conclusion
ssuming
spouses
competent
neither
one
master
possessing
power
override
constitutional
right
deny
entry
castle
ante
issue
hand
conflict
two
equals
women
authority
consent
justice
stevens
claims
men
alone
follow
spouse
refuses
consent
winner
contest
justice
stevens
well
followed
historical
developments
opposite
conclusion
male
female
equal
partners
ante
women
consent
search
property
men
longer
obstruct
wishes
men
women
equal
majority
regime
sexes
veto
consent
dissent
view
sexes
finally
must
express
grave
doubt
today
decision
deserves
justice
stevens
celebration
part
forward
march
women
equality
given
usual
patterns
domestic
violence
often
police
expected
encounter
situation
man
urges
enter
home
woman
simultaneously
demands
stay
common
practical
effect
today
decision
insofar
contest
sexes
concerned
give
men
power
stop
women
allowing
police
homes
curiously
enough
precisely
power
justice
stevens
disapprovingly
presumes
men
georgia
petitioner
scott
fitz
randolph
writ
certiorari
georgia
march
justice
thomas
dissenting
long
recognized
act
responsible
citizenship
individuals
give
whatever
information
may
aid
law
enforcement
miranda
arizona
consistent
principle
held
coolidge
new
hampshire
fourth
amendment
search
occurs
spouse
accused
voluntarily
leads
police
potential
evidence
wrongdoing
accused
coolidge
squarely
controls
case
need
address
whether
police
permissibly
conducted
general
search
randolph
home
based
randolph
consent
respectfully
dissent
instant
case
randolph
told
police
responding
domestic
dispute
respondent
using
substantial
quantity
cocaine
upon
police
request
consented
general
search
residence
investigate
statements
however
recitation
facts
demonstrates
ante
record
clear
general
search
occurred
instead
sergeant
brett
murray
asked
randolph
cocaine
located
showed
upstairs
bedroom
saw
piece
cut
straw
dresser
corrected
tr
motion
suppression
hearing
case
super
sumter
pp
upon
closer
examination
sergeant
murray
observed
white
residue
straw
concluded
straw
used
ingesting
cocaine
collected
straw
residue
evidence
sergeant
murray
entry
randolphs
home
invitation
randolph
shown
evidence
respondent
cocaine
use
constitute
fourth
amendment
search
precedents
action
agent
government
constitute
search
within
meaning
fourth
amendment
amendment
intended
restraint
upon
activities
sovereign
authority
intended
limitation
upon
governmental
agencies
burdeau
mcdowell
emphasis
added
see
also
coolidge
applying
principle
coolidge
held
citizen
leads
police
officers
home
shared
spouse
show
evidence
relevant
investigation
crime
citizen
acting
agent
police
thus
fourth
amendment
search
occurred
review
facts
coolidge
clearly
demonstrates
governs
case
police
interrogated
coolidge
part
investigation
murder
two
officers
sent
house
speak
wife
course
questioning
coolidge
police
asked
whether
husband
owned
guns
coolidge
replied
affirmative
offered
retrieve
weapons
police
apparently
operating
assumption
help
exonerate
husband
ibid
police
accompanied
coolidge
bedroom
collect
guns
well
clothing
coolidge
told
husband
wearing
night
murder
ibid
coolidge
argued
evidence
guns
clothing
suppressed
product
unlawful
search
coolidge
acting
agent
police
complying
made
recognized
coolidge
sought
guns
give
police
wholly
initiative
doubt
existing
law
articles
later
admissible
evidence
ibid
cooperation
police
pursuant
request
transform
agent
part
policy
underlying
fourth
fourteenth
amendments
discourage
citizens
aiding
utmost
ability
apprehension
criminals
police
acting
normally
properly
asked
guns
questioning
coolidge
clothing
logical
way
coercive
fourth
amendment
require
police
avert
eyes
coolidge
produced
guns
clothes
case
indistinguishable
coolidge
compelling
conclusion
randolph
acting
agent
police
admitted
sergeant
murray
home
led
incriminating
coolidge
accord
offered
husband
weapons
clothing
police
without
implicating
fourth
amendment
randolph
simply
retrieved
straw
house
given
sergeant
murray
indeed
majority
appears
concede
much
ante
acting
initiative
may
able
deliver
evidence
police
coolidge
supra
tell
police
knows
use
magistrate
getting
warrant
drawing
constitutionally
significant
distinction
occurred
randolph
independent
production
relevant
evidence
inconsistent
coolidge
unduly
accordingly
trial
appropriately
denied
respondent
motion
suppress
evidence
randolph
provided
police
evidence
obtained
result
consequent
search
warrant
therefore
reverse
judgment
georgia
footnotes
four
courts
appeals
considered
question
concluded
consent
remains
effective
face
express
objection
see
morning
donlin
hendrix
cadc
per
curiam
sumlin
state
courts
addressed
question
majority
reached
conclusion
well
see
love
state
ark
laramie
hysong
wyo
cf
state
leach
en
banc
requiring
consent
present
mindful
multiplicity
living
arrangements
vary
terms
used
describe
residential
mean
however
suggest
rule
applied
similarly
varied
cf
mincey
arizona
acknowledging
right
police
respond
emergency
situations
threatening
life
limb
indicating
police
may
conduct
warrantless
search
provided
search
circumscribed
exigencies
justify
dissent
view
centuries
special
protection
privacy
home
principal
dissent
equates
inviting
police
home
contemporaneous
objection
reporting
secret
post
opinion
roberts
emphasis
places
false
equation
suggests
deliberate
intent
devalue
importance
privacy
dwelling
place
attitude
privacy
dwelling
special
underlies
dissent
easy
assumption
privacy
shared
another
individual
privacy
waived
purposes
including
warrantless
searches
police
post
generalized
interest
expedient
law
enforcement
without
justify
warrantless
search
see
mincey
supra
privacy
person
home
property
may
totally
sacrificed
name
maximum
simplicity
enforcement
criminal
law
coolidge
new
hampshire
warrant
requirement
inconvenience
somehow
claims
police
efficiency
sometimes
course
exchange
information
like
front
objecting
inhabitant
may
render
consent
irrelevant
creating
exigency
justifies
immediate
action
police
part
objecting
tenant
incapacitated
destroying
easily
disposable
evidence
time
required
get
warrant
see
illinois
mcarthur
denying
suspect
access
trailer
home
police
applied
search
warrant
fairly
perceived
need
act
spot
preserve
evidence
may
justify
entry
search
exigent
circumstances
exception
warrant
requirement
cf
schmerber
california
warrantless
search
permitted
delay
necessary
obtain
warrant
threatened
destruction
evidence
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
additional
exigent
circumstances
might
justify
warrantless
searches
see
warden
md
penitentiary
hayden
hot
pursuit
chimel
california
protecting
safety
police
officers
michigan
tyler
imminent
destruction
building
johnson
likelihood
suspect
imminently
flee
understand
possibility
battered
individual
afraid
express
fear
candidly
seem
reason
think
person
invite
police
dwelling
search
evidence
another
hence
rule
crediting
consent
denial
consent
built
hoping
protect
household
victims
distort
fourth
amendment
little
constructive
effect
domestic
abuse
investigations
dissent
critical
holding
pass
upon
constitutionality
search
third
tenant
government
wishes
use
evidence
seized
search
consent
one
subject
contemporaneous
objection
another
post
decide
case
us
different
one
see
lafave
consent
search
frequently
relied
upon
police
means
investigating
suspected
criminal
conduct
omitted
strauss
reconstructing
consent
crim
although
precise
figures
detailing
number
searches
conducted
pursuant
consent
probably
never
available
dispute
type
searches
affect
tens
thousands
hundreds
thousands
people
every
year
omitted
footnotes
see
schneckloth
bustamonte
marshall
dissenting
pointing
hard
comprehend
decision
made
without
knowledge
available
alternatives
treated
choice
arguing
consent
search
means
person
chosen
forego
right
exclude
police
place
seek
search
follows
consent
considered
meaningful
choice
unless
knew
fact
exclude
police
advice
surely
preferable
officer
expression
desire
enter
search
words
may
construed
either
command
question
see
douglas
dissenting
noting
nder
many
circumstances
reasonable
person
might
read
officer
may
courteous
expression
demand
backed
force
law
quoting
bustamonte
schneckloth
footnotes
majority
considers
comparison
false
equation
even
discerns
deliberate
intent
devalue
importance
privacy
dwelling
place
ante
differences
majority
dissent
reduce
majority
view
police
may
enter
search
objecting
present
door
may
asleep
next
room
view
consent
effective
cases
seems
bit
overwrought
characterize
former
approach
affording
great
protection
man
castle
latter
signaling
centuries
special
protection
privacy
home
ibid
matlock
drew
comparison
majority
faults
today
see
deliberate
intent
majority
ascribes
dissent
apparently
shared
courts
appeals
great
majority
state
courts
considered
question
see
ante
majority
also
mischaracterizes
dissent
assuming
privacy
shared
another
individual
privacy
waived
purposes
including
warrantless
searches
police
ante
point
course
person
waives
privacy
sharing
space
others
police
may
enter
sharing
space
necessarily
entails
limited
yielding
privacy
person
space
shared
person
shares
authority
consent
search
shared
space
see
supra
response
concern
majority
asserts
rule
applies
merely
evidentiary
searches
ante
fundamental
premise
majority
argument
inviting
recognized
authority
open
door
objection
ante
see
also
ante
physically
present
stated
refusal
permit
entry
prevails
rendering
warrantless
search
unreasonable
invalid
emphasis
added
ante
caller
standing
door
shared
premises
confidence
enter
fellow
tenant
stood
saying
emphasis
added
ante
disputed
invitation
without
gives
police
officer
claim
reasonableness
entering
emphasis
added
point
majority
rule
transforms
may
begun
request
consent
conduct
evidentiary
search
something
else
altogether
giving
veto
power
consenting
wishes
occupant
exclude
police
entry
majority
afford
quite
vulnerable
consenting
sufficient
time
gather
belongings
leave
see
ante
apparently
putting
one
side
fact
castle
footnotes
although
described
coolidge
consent
case
matlock
opinion
terms
rest
conception
coolidge
authority
consent
search
house
possible
relevance
coolidge
absence
scene
coolidge
white
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
similarly
coolidge
new
hampshire
held
wife
voluntary
action
turning
police
husband
guns
clothing
constitute
search
seizure
government
courts
appeals
disagreed
appropriate
inquiry
performed
determining
whether
involvement
police
transforms
private
individual
agent
instrument
police
see
pervaz
summarizing
approaches
various
circuits
similarity
case
coolidge
avoids
need
resolve
broader
dispute
present
case
sergeant
murray
unlike
officers
coolidge
may
intended
perform
general
search
house
inconsequential
ultimately
viewed
items
shown
randolph
relevant
coolidge
intended
aid
police
apprehending
criminal
believed
exonerate
husband
randolph
believed
aiding
police
implicate
husband