United States v. Matlock

SCOTUSCase| Litigants = United States v. Matlock
ArgueDate = December 10
ArgueYear = 1973
DecideDate = February 20
DecideYear = 1974
FullName = United States v. William Earl Matlock
USVol= 415
USPage= 164
Citation= 94 S. Ct. 988, 39 L. Ed. 2d 242, 1974 U.S. LEXIS 8
Prior= Motion to suppress evidence granted, W.D. Wis.; affirmed, 476 F.2d 1083 (7th Cir. 1973); cert. granted, 412 U.S. 917 (1973)
Holding = When the prosecution seeks to justify a warrantless search by proof of voluntary consent it is not limited to proof that consent was given by the defendant, but may show that permission to search was obtained from a third party who possessed common authority over or other sufficient relationship to the premises or effects sought to be inspected. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded.
SCOTUS=1972-1975
Majority=White
Join=Majority=Burger, Stewart, Blackmun, Powell, Rehnquist
Dissent=Douglas
Dissent2=Brennan
JoinDissent2=Marshall
LawsApplied=U.S. Const. amend. IV

"United States v. Matlock", 415 U.S. 164 (1974) was a Supreme Court of the United States case in which the Court which ruled that the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures was not violated when the police obtained voluntary consent from a third party who possessed common authority over the premises sought to be searched. The ruling of the court established the "co-occupant consent rule," which was later explained by "Illinois v. Rodriguez", 497 U.S. 177 (1990) and distinguished by "Georgia v. Randolph" (2006), in which the court held that a third party could not consent over the objections of a present co-occupant.

ee also

* List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 415

External links

* [http://laws.findlaw.com/us/415/164.html Opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States]