Georgia v. Randolph
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Georgia_v._Randolph an entity of type: Thing
Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103 (2006), is a case in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that without a search warrant, police had no constitutional right to search a house where one resident consents to the search while another resident objects. The Court distinguished this case from the "co-occupant consent rule" established in United States v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164 (1974), which permitted one resident to consent in absence of the co-occupant.
rdf:langString
rdf:langString
Georgia v. Randolph
rdf:langString
rdf:langString
Georgia v. Scott Fitz Randolph
xsd:integer
4478537
xsd:integer
1124870385
rdf:langString
Thomas
rdf:langString
Roberts
rdf:langString
Scalia
xsd:integer
4
rdf:langString
Scalia
rdf:langString
Stevens, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer
<second>
172800.0
<second>
17280.0
xsd:integer
103
xsd:integer
547
xsd:gMonthDay
--11-08
xsd:integer
2005
rdf:langString
Georgia v. Randolph,
xsd:gMonthDay
--03-22
xsd:integer
2006
rdf:langString
Georgia v. Scott Fitz Randolph
rdf:langString
In the circumstances here at issue, a physically present co-occupant's stated refusal to permit entry prevails, rendering the warrantless search unreasonable and invalid as to him. Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed.
rdf:langString
Georgia v. Randolph
rdf:langString
Souter
rdf:langString
Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103 (2006), is a case in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that without a search warrant, police had no constitutional right to search a house where one resident consents to the search while another resident objects. The Court distinguished this case from the "co-occupant consent rule" established in United States v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164 (1974), which permitted one resident to consent in absence of the co-occupant.
rdf:langString
Stevens
rdf:langString
Breyer
rdf:langString
Alito
xsd:nonNegativeInteger
12575