In Smith v. City of Santa Clara, published November 30, 2017, the 9th Circuit affirmed a judgment after jury verdict in favor of the defendant city and its police officers who conducted a warrantless search of a duplex in which the plaintiff resided, over the plaintiff's protests. The police had probable cause to believe that the plaintiff's daughter, a probationer, had stabbed a victim and was at large. The daughter had repeatedly listed the plaintiff's duplex as the daughter's residence. The plaintiff argued that under U.S. Supreme Court authority holding that a warrantless search of a residence based only on a resident's consent violates the Fourth Amendment if another resident objects to the search, the search violated her Fourth Amendment rights.
The 9th Circuit held that under the circumstances–the officers had probable cause to believe that a probationer who had committed a violent crime and who was at large lived in the residence–the interests in apprehending the probationer and thus protecting the public outweighed the non-probationer resident's privacy interests. The case law concerning consent did not apply, because the rule that warrantless searches of probationers' residences are permitted is not based on consent.
Leave a Reply