United States v. William E. Block

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a mother's consent to the search of her son's room did not extend to his locked footlocker
• concluding that mother could consent to the search of her son’s room, but not to the search of her son’s trunk in his room
• finding that the defendant's mother had authority to permit inspection of room but that her authority did not extend to the interior of the footlocker within the room
• noting that “the real linchpin of [third party consent] is not agency power in the third person but simple authority in that person’s own right to permit inspection”
• holding that where a defendant was a guest occupant in his mother’s house, his mother had authority to consent to a search of the bedroom in which the defendant was staying, but did not have authority to consent to a search of a footlocker within that bedroom
• holding mother lacked authority to consent to search of son’s footlocker where “[t]he trunk was fastened shut by some means that indicated to the officers that it was locked and that a key was required to open it”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).