October Term 2005 · Docket 04-1067
Can one co-occupant consent to a search if another objects?
The dispute centers on whether police may search a home when one resident consents and another expressly refuses.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Goldstein argued that the Court should find consent searches unreasonable when a co-occupant objects.
Mr. Goldstein stated that the Court looks to broader social understandings rather than specific family dynamics.
Justice O'Connor questioned whether social acceptability determines the validity of such consent.
Justice Kennedy explored the scope of a search when one spouse consents to limited areas.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 47-31 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 47-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 47-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-7 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 9-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 9-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 21-23 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 21-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 49-54 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 49-54
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 9-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 9-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 19-19 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 19-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 21-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 21-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 3-5 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 3-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-39 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 49-1 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 49-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 17-23 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 17-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 25-9 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 25-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 33-35 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 33-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 39-45 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 39-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 19-29 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 19-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 25-29 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 25-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 33-33 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 33-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 41-41 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 41-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 43-54 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 43-54
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 9-15 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 9-15
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests the limits of consent searches in shared living spaces. It asks if a single resident's permission overrides a co-occupant's explicit objection.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 47-31 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 47-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 9-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 9-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 25-9 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 25-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 41-41 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 41-41
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 8, 2005.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-7 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 11-15
What each side wants
Georgia wants the Court to hold that one resident's consent validates the search despite the other's objection.
Randolph wants the Court to hold that a co-occupant's express objection blocks the search.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 47-31 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 47-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 9-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 9-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 25-9 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 25-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 41-41 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 41-41
What each side says
Georgia argues that social norms allow one resident to admit police even if the other disagrees.
Randolph argues that a co-occupant's express objection makes the search unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 47-31 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 47-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 9-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 9-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 25-9 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 25-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 41-41 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 41-41
What the justices asked
Justice Kennedy asked if a wife could limit a search to specific areas despite her husband's objection.
Justice O'Connor asked if it is socially acceptable to let police in against a spouse's wishes.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 47-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 21-23 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 21-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 49-54 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 49-54
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 9-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 9-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 19-19 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 19-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 21-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 21-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 3-5 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 3-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-39 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 49-1 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 49-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 17-23 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 17-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 33-35 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 33-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 39-45 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 39-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 19-29 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 19-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 25-29 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 25-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 33-33 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 33-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 43-54 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 43-54
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 9-15 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 9-15
Why it matters
This case defines the balance between individual privacy and police authority in shared homes. It clarifies how courts evaluate consent when residents disagree. The outcome shapes future searches in apartments and houses. It protects or limits the rights of co-occupants. It guides law enforcement on valid consent standards. It impacts how families interact with police during investigations.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 47-31 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 47-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 9-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 9-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 25-9 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 25-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 41-41 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 41-41
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 47-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-7 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 21-23 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 21-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 49-54 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 49-54
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 9-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 9-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 19-19 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 19-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 21-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 21-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-27 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 23-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 3-5 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 3-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-39 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 49-1 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 49-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 17-23 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 17-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 33-35 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 33-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 39-45 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 39-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 19-29 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 19-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 25-29 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 25-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 33-33 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 33-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 43-54 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 43-54
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 9-15 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 9-15
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 47-31 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 47-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 9-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 9-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 25-9 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 25-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 41-41 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 41-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 47-31 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 47-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 9-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 9-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 25-9 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 25-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 41-41 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 41-41
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.