support@bluetogold.com

or use our live chat

888-579-7796

Customer Service

LEGAL

RESEARCH

Stoner v. California

Facts

Officers suspected the defendant had committed a robbery and was presently located in a hotel room. They went to the hotel. The officers had neither search nor arrest warrants. They obtained the consent of the hotel clerk to enter and search the defendantโ€™s room. After doing so, they located evidence of the defendantโ€™s participation in the robbery.

Issue

Whether the hotel clerk had the authority to grant consent to search the defendantโ€™s hotel room?

Held

No. The clerk did not have the authority to waive the defendantโ€™s constitutional protection of the Fourth Amendment.

Discussion

The Court held that it was important to remember it was the defendantโ€™s constitutional right which was at stake here, not the night clerkโ€™s nor the hotelโ€™s. It was a right, therefore, which only Stoner could waive by word or deed, either directly or through an agent. While the night clerk clearly and unambiguously consented to the search, there was nothing to indicate the government had any basis to believe that Stoner authorized the night clerk to allow the officers to search his room.

Citation

376 U.S. 483, 84 S. Ct. 889 (1964)

Send a message!

Subscribe to Update