101 A.D.3d 913
N.Y. App. Div.2012Background
- Police responded to a domestic dispute at defendant and girlfriend's apartment on Oct 23, 2009.
- Girlfriend made the 911 call; officers separated the parties for interviews.
- Girlfriend led an officer to a closet where three guns and ammunition were found.
- Girlfriend signed a consent-to-search statement; defendant waived Miranda and gave a written statement.
- The hearing court suppressed the physical evidence and the written statement; People appealed.
- Court held: consent by co-occupant was sufficient; suppression was erroneous; written statement admissible.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the search valid with a co-occupant's consent despite the other occupant's objection? | Defendant argues Randolph prohibits co-occupant consent when objecting present. | Lopez/Limits permit suppression if objecting occupant is present. | Consent by one occupant valid; objector's presence does not invalidate search. |
| Was the exclusion of evidence proper given the co-occupant consent? | Consent authorized the search; evidence should not be suppressed. | Court should suppress due to improper consent dynamics. | Hearing court erred; suppression reversed. |
| Does the admissibility of the written statement depend on the search's validity? | If search valid, statement derived from it is admissible. | If search illegally tainted, statement may be fruit of the poisonous tree. | Statement admissible; not suppressed as fruit of illegality. |
Key Cases Cited
- Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103 (US 2006) (co-occupant consent invalidates search when objecting occupant is present)
- United States v. Lopez, 547 F.3d 397 (2d Cir. 2008) (objecting co-occupant presence limits third-party consent loopholes)
- United States v. Parker, 469 F.3d 1074 (9th Cir. 2006) (onus on objecting occupant to object; police need not secure consent from objecting co-occupant)
- Mais v. People, 71 A.D.3d 1163 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010) (fruit-of-the-poisonous-tree analysis; search validity affects statement admissibility)
- Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (US 1963) (exclusionary rule and fruit-of-the-poisonous-tree doctrine)