Illinois v. Rodriguez

Illinois v. Rodriguez, 497 U.S. 177 (1990), is a U.S. Supreme Court case dealing with the issue of whether a warrantless search conducted pursuant to third party consent violates the Fourth Amendment when the third party does not actually possess common authority over the premises.

Illinois v. Rodriguez
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued March 20, 1990
Decided June 21, 1990
Full case nameIllinois v. Edward Rodriguez
Citations497 U.S. 177 (more)
110 S. Ct. 2793; 111 L. Ed. 2d 148; 1990 U.S. LEXIS 3295; 58 U.S.L.W. 4892
Case history
PriorCert. to Appellate Court of Illinois, 1st Dist. reversed and remanded
Holding
Under the Fourth Amendment, a warrantless entry is valid when based upon the consent of a third party whom the police, at the time of the entry, reasonably believe to possess common authority over the premises, but who in fact does not.
Court membership
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr. · Byron White
Thurgood Marshall · Harry Blackmun
John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor
Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy
Case opinions
MajorityScalia, joined by Rehnquist, White, Blackmun, O'Connor, Kennedy
DissentMarshall, joined by Brennan, Stevens
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. IV.

Opinion of the Court

In an opinion by Justice Scalia and decided 6–3, the Court held that a warrantless search of premises, when a third party consents to the search but does not possess actual common authority over those premises, is valid if the authorities "reasonably believed" at the time of the search that the third party possessed common authority over the premises.[1][2]

In reaching its decision, the Court noted that "reasonableness," not consent, is the touchstone of Fourth Amendment jurisprudence; the Constitution only prohibits "unreasonable" searches and seizures. Therefore, the constitutional validity of a police determination of consent to enter is not judged by whether the police were correct in their assessment, but by whether, based on the facts available at the moment, it was reasonable to conclude that the consenting party had authority over the premises.

See also

Further reading
  • Campbell, Tammy (1992). "Illinois v. Rodriguez: Should Apparent Authority Validate Third-Party Consent Searches". University of Colorado Law Review. 63: 481. ISSN 0041-9516.
  • Capozza, Frank C. (1991). "Whither the Fourth Amendment: An Analysis of Illinois v. Rodriguez". Indiana Law Review. 25: 515. ISSN 0090-4198.
  • Kagehiro, Dorothy K.; Laufer, William S. (1991). "Illinois v. Rodriguez and the Social Psychology of Third-Party Consent". Criminal Law Bulletin. 27 (1): 42–50. ISSN 0011-1317.
  • Kagehiro, Dorothy K.; Laufer, William S.; Taylor, Ralph B. (1992). "Social Perceptions of Third-Party Consent and the Reasonableness Test of Illinois v. Rodriguez". Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. 29 (2): 217–228. doi:10.1177/0022427892029002007. S2CID 145407989.
  • Wieber, M. C. (1993). "Theory and Practice of Illinois v. Rodriguez: Why an Officer's Reasonable Belief about a Third Party's Authority to Consent does not protect a Criminal Suspect's Rights". Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology. 84 (3): 604–641. doi:10.2307/1143965. JSTOR 1143965.

References
  1. Grady, William (June 22, 1990). "Court widens warantless searches". Chicago Tribune. p. 2:1. Retrieved June 7, 2022 – via Newspapers.com.
  2. Grady, William (June 22, 1990). "Court widens warantless searches (continued)". Chicago Tribune. p. 2:6. Retrieved June 7, 2022 – via Newspapers.com.


This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.