Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103 (2006)

In the case of Georgia v. Randolph, the underlying events began with a domestic dispute between Scott Randolph and his wife, Janet. After separating in May 2001, Janet returned to their shared residence in Americus, Georgia, on July 6, 2001, with their son. Following a complaint from Janet to the police about Scott's alleged cocaine use and concerns regarding the custody of their child, police officers arrived at the home. Upon Scott's return, he denied the allegations and asserted that it was Janet who had substance abuse issues. During the police's investigation, Janet informed them that there were items of drug evidence in the house and consented to a search, despite Scott's explicit refusal. The procedural history of the case involved Scott Randolph's indictment for possession of cocaine, which stemmed from evidence obtained during the police search of his home. After the initial search, which was conducted with Janet's consent but against Scott's refusal, the police left to obtain a warrant. Upon their return, Janet withdrew her consent, yet the police had already seized some evidence. Scott moved to suppress this evidence, arguing that it was obtained without valid consent due to his explicit objection. The trial court denied his motion, ruling that Janet had the authority to consent to the search. The case reached the Supreme Court of the United States on a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Georgia. The central issue was whether a warrantless search could be deemed lawful when one co-occupant consents while another, present at the scene, expressly refuses. The Court ultimately held that the refusal of a physically present co-occupant prevails over the consent of another, rendering the search unreasonable and invalid as to the objecting occupant.

Whether a warrantless search of a shared residence is lawful when one occupant consents to the search while the other occupant, who is present, expressly refuses consent.

The judgment is reversed.