SKIP TO CONTENT
We use both our own and third-party cookies for statistical purposes and to improve our services. If you continue to browse, we consider that you accept the use of these.
  • Celebrating 20 Years of Training Excellence 2004-2024

Juvenile Search – Consent Given by Mother

Can mom give consent to search her son’s room? Also, what if, similar to Georgia v. Randolph, the son is present and objects?

This update covered Georgia v. Randolph previously. Remember, when consent is given by one tenant, the other tenant can withdraw consent if they are present. The Randolph decision represented a change in the law. Courts are struggling with this issue. One of the areas of disagreement is this-does the decision apply only to residences or does it apply to personal property? Most courts have sensibly held that Randolph is limited to a residence.

JUVENILES AND RANDOLPH

An interesting variation on the Randolph theme was addressed in a recent California court of appeal decision In re D.C., 2010 WL 3720164.

Officers were investigating allegations of drug sales in a housing project. In the course of their investigation they arrested a juvenile probationer. The officers happened upon the probationer’s mother. The probationer was handcuffed at this point. The mother consented to a search of the apartment. When the officers arrived at the apartment, D.C., a minor, stood in the doorway, told the officers they could not enter the apartment. D.C. only stepped away from the door when his mother told him to get out of the way.

THE SEARCH

There were three bedrooms in the apartment. One bedroom was used exclusively by D.C. The officers searched D.C.’s room and found stolen property. D.C.’s motion to suppress was denied and his petition was sustained (found guilty).

D.C.’s APPEAL

D. C. appealed on more than one ground. D.C. argued his mother had no right to consent to his room, and even if she did, his objection should have overridden the mother’s consent.

The court held that the mother had apparent authority to provide consent to search D.C.’s room as she was the adult cohabitant. There was no evidence that D.C. paid rent and therefore had exclusive dominion over his room. Moreover, D.C. submitted to his mother’s authority when she told him to get out of the way of the officers when they wished to enter the residence.

As to the second issue, D.C., as a cohabitant, on scene, can withdraw otherwise valid consent-the court brushed aside this objection as Randolph dealt with two ADULT cohabitants. Here, as D.C. was a juvenile, the court found Randolph did not apply.

 

Chuck Gillingham is a veteran prosecutor. He is also an instructor for the California District Attorneys’ Association and for Santa Clara University School of Law.

  • I highly recommend this training for any Probation staff who have the necessity to interview/interrogate individuals for investigation purposes.

    —R. Bret Fidler, Santa Clara County Probation Department
  • Instructional style is engaging and highly effective.

    —George Laing, Fire Prevention Captain, Investigator
  • The information presented was highly relevant to my job and was presented in a manner that was organized and very easy to digest.

    —Michael McGarvey, California State Prison, San Quentin
  • Incredible training with amazing real world instruction. I have been taking law enforcement classes for over 30 years and by far this is the best presented and most useful.

    —Det. Brian Dale, Portland Police Bureau
  • This training by far has been the most informative and most effective I've attended. The instructors engaged the students in a manner that made me want to speak my opinion, ask questions, and participate.

    —Julio Ibarra, Merced County Sheriff’s Office
  • Effective teaching teams! The presentation of the material was consistently interesting, and intelligent without being too intellectualized.

    —Michele Keller, Deputy Probation Officer, County of Alameda
  • Your training has made the greatest and most direct impact on my assignment of any training class that I've taken.

    —Ken Gelskey, National City Police Department
  • It not often that you go to a training that you really, really want to pay attention to. Because of the high quality information and style of presentation, I knew that if I looked away I was going to miss out.

    —Quinten Graves, Oregon State Police
  • I will continue to use and pass on this information because I really believe in the instructors and their approach.

    —Kimberly Meyer, Washoe County Sheriff's Department
  • This was, by far and away the best training I have received in 15 plus years of Law Enforcement. The instructors are experienced, engaging, articulate, and very entertaining. I will be recommending this training to multiple agencies.

    —Mark Paynter, Oregon DOC
  • This training provided the useful tools necessary for assessing the veracity of a suspected child abuser, which goes a long way in helping to protect children.

    —Sunny Burgan, MSSW, LCSW, Social Work Supervisor, Santa Clara County DFCS
  • Your training gave me the confidence and tools to interview the suspect for over 5 hours and to bring a closure to the case.

    —Daniel Phelan, San Jose Police Department
  • This was, by far, one of the most useful training classes I've attended since becoming an investigator.

    —Steven Aiello, Antioch Police Department