Court Opinion

ID: 9885101
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-06 03:30:05.013307+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:48:43.928712
License: Public Domain

MR. JUSTICE SCHAEFER, dissenting: The opinion of the majority is based upon the defendant’s “reasonable expectation of privacy.” In my opinion what the defendant expected is irrelevant. What is significant is the reasonableness of the conduct of the police officers. Viewed from their perspective, the record shows that they were asked by the defendant’s mother to open the locked door and search the area in which the suppressed articles were found. I see nothing in the stipulated facts to indicate that the police officers had been informed of any restrictions upon the mother’s right to ask them to do what they did. And in the absence of such an indication, it seems to me that neither they nor we should be concerned with the details of any unusual conditions relating to the minor defendant’s occupancy of a portion of his mother’s apartment. MR. CHIEF JUSTICE UNDERWOOD joins in this dissent.