United States v. Viento Lynn Childs

Good Law
91 Daily Journal DAR 10889·944 F.2d 491·1991 WL 169543·1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 20622·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7177
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 6, 199190-30429California3,240 words

Opinion

Opinion

Alarcon, J.

Viento Lynn Childs appeals from the denial of her motion to suppress evidence seized without a warrant from a houseboat she and Robert Moore shared as their residence. The district court concluded that Moore’s voluntary consent to the search justified the officers’ failure to obtain a warrant.

Childs seeks reversal on the following grounds:

One. The district court erred as a matter of law in concluding that law enforcement officers are not required to obtain a valid consent from each joint occupant, who is physically present, to justify a war-rantless search.

Two. The district court’s finding that Moore’s consent was voluntary is clearly erroneous.

Three. A consent to search is invalid if it is obtained following an unnecessary delay in taking the arrested person before a magistrate.

Four. A consent to search is invalid if it is obtained after a person has invoked his or her right to the assistance of counsel during custodial investigation.

We affirm because we conclude that (1) a joint occupant’s voluntary consent is sufficient to justify a warrantless search regardless of the physical presence of the other occupant, and (2) the district court did not clearly err in finding…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.