Fernandez v. California: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
MarkTraceur (talk | contribs) Whiiiiitespace. |
add court composition |
||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
|Docket=12–7822 |
|Docket=12–7822 |
||
|USVol=571 |
|USVol=571 |
||
|USPage= |
|USPage=___ |
||
|Prior= |
|Prior= |
||
|Subsequent= |
|Subsequent= |
||
|Holding=When a resident who objects to the search of his dwelling is removed for objectively reasonably purposes (such as lawful arrest), the remaining resident may validly consent to search. |
|Holding=When a resident who objects to the search of his dwelling is removed for objectively reasonably purposes (such as lawful arrest), the remaining resident may validly consent to search. |
||
|SCOTUS= |
|SCOTUS=2010–present |
||
|Majority=Alito |
|Majority=Alito |
||
|JoinMajority=Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Breyer |
|JoinMajority=Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Breyer |
Revision as of 09:43, 4 March 2014
Fernandez v. California | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Argued November 13, 2013 Decided February 25, 2014 | |
Full case name | Walter Fernandez, Petitioner v. California |
Docket no. | 12–7822 |
Citations | 571 U.S. ___ (more) |
Holding | |
When a resident who objects to the search of his dwelling is removed for objectively reasonably purposes (such as lawful arrest), the remaining resident may validly consent to search. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Alito, joined by Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Breyer |
Concurrence | Scalia |
Concurrence | Thomas |
Dissent | Ginsburg, joined by Sotomayor, Kagan |
Laws applied | |
U.S. Const. amend. IV |
Fernandez v. California was a 2014 U.S. Supreme Court case that explored the limits of Georgia v. Randolph, a 2006 case that held that consent to search a dwelling is invalid in the presence of an objecting co-resident. Fernandez, however, held that when the objecting co-resident is removed for objectively reasonably purposes (such as lawful arrest), the remaining resident may validly consent to search.