Skip to main content

Silva v. State

Citations

  • 344 So. 2d 559

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • joint occupant's consent not valid in face of other joint occupant's objection where both are present
  • “a present, objecting party should not have his constitutional rights ignored . . . [due to a] property interest shared with another”
  • police had no authority, stemming from girlfriend's consent, to search a closet set aside for accused's exclusive use, over the objections of the present accused
  • “[t]hough a joint occupant should have authority to consent to a search of jointly held premises if the other party is unavailable, a present, objecting party should not have his constitutional rights ignored because of a leasehold or other property interest shared with another”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Adkins

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

54 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

25 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.