Illinois v. Rodriguez

Illinois v. Rodriguez

Argued March 20, 1990
Decided June 21, 1990
Full case name Illinois v. Rodriguez
Citations

497 U.S. 177 (more)

110 S. Ct. 2793; 111 L. Ed. 2d 148; 1990 U.S. LEXIS 3295; 58 U.S.L.W. 4892
Prior history Cert. 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
Case opinions
Majority Scalia, joined by Rehnquist, White, Blackmun, O'Connor, Kennedy
Dissent Marshall, joined by Brennan, Stevens
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. IV.

Illinois v. Rodriguez, 497 U.S. 177 (1990), is a 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. In a 6-3 decision authored by Justice Antonin Scalia, the Court held that such searches are valid if, at the time of the search, the authorities "reasonably believe" the third party possesses common authority over the premises.

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

External links

Wikisource has original text related to this article: