Fernandez v. California
| Docket No. | Op. Below | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12-7822 | Cal. Ct. App. | Nov 13, 2013 | Feb 25, 2014 | 6-3 | Alito | OT 2013 |
Holding: The Court"s decision in Georgia v. Randolph, holding that the consent of one occupant is insufficient to authorize police to search a premises if another occupant is present and objects to the search, does not apply when an occupant provides consent well after the objecting occupant has been removed from the premises.
Judgment: Affirmed, 6-3, in an opinion by Justice Alito on February 25, 2014. Justice Scalia and Justice Thomas filed concurring opinions. Justice Ginsburg filed a dissenting opinion in which Justice Sotomayor and Justice Kagan joined.
SCOTUSblog Coverage
- Five thoughts on Fernandez v. California (Orin Kerr, February 26, 2014)
- Opinion analysis: The Court narrowly limits a precedent allowing co-occupant objections to warrantless consent searches (Rory Little, February 25, 2014)
- Argument recap: Court seems poised to limit Georgia v. Randolph to physically present co-tenants (Rory Little, November 15, 2013)
- Fernandez v. California and the problem of third-party consent (Orin Kerr, November 6, 2013)
- Court to rule on government prayer (Lyle Denniston, May 20, 2013)
| Date | Proceedings and Orders |
|---|---|
| 12/17/2012 | Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 22, 2013) |
| 01/02/2013 | Waiver of right of respondent California to respond filed. |
| 01/17/2013 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of February 15, 2013. |
| 02/04/2013 | Response Requested . (Due March 6, 2013) |
| 02/28/2013 | Order extending time to file response to petition to and including April 5, 2013. |
| 04/03/2013 | Brief of respondent California in opposition filed. |
| 04/17/2013 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 9, 2013. |
| 05/13/2013 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 16, 2013. |
| 05/20/2013 | Motion to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED. |
| 06/07/2013 | Motion to appoint counsel filed by petitioner Walter Fernandez. |
| 06/12/2013 | The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including July 31, 2013. |
| 06/12/2013 | The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including September 25, 2013. |
| 06/25/2013 | Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 26, 2013. |
| 06/27/2013 | Motion to appoint counsel filed by petitioner GRANTED. Gerald P. Peters, Esquire, of Thousand Oaks, California, is appointed to serve as counsel for the petitioner in this case. |
| 07/31/2013 | Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed.) |
| 07/31/2013 | Brief of petitioner Walter Fernandez filed. |
| 08/07/2013 | Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed. |
| 08/19/2013 | CIRCULATED. |
| 08/20/2013 | SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, November 13, 2013 |
| 09/19/2013 | Record received from Court of Appeal of California, 2nd Appellate District.(1 box) |
| 09/25/2013 | Brief of respondent California filed. (Distributed) |
| 10/02/2013 | Brief amicus curiae of United States filed. (Distributed) |
| 10/02/2013 | Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed. |
| 10/21/2013 | Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED. |
| 10/25/2013 | Reply of petitioner Walter Fernandez filed. (Distributed) |
| 11/13/2013 | Argued. For petitioner: Jeffrey L. Fisher, Stanford, Cal. For respondent: Louis W. Karlin, Deputy Attorney General, Los Angeles, Cal.; and Joseph R. Palmore, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) |
| 02/25/2014 | Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Alito, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, and Breyer, JJ., joined. Scalia, J., and Thomas, J., filed concurring opinions. Ginsburg, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Sotomayor and Kagan, JJ., joined. |
| 03/31/2014 | MANDATE ISSUED. |
| 03/31/2014 | Record received from Court of Appeal of California, 2nd Appellate District has been returned. |
Disclosure: Kevin Russell, of Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel to the petitioner in this case.
Issue: Whether, under”Georgia v. Randolph,“a defendant must be personally present and objecting when police officers ask a co-tenant for consent to conduct a warrantless search or whether a defendant”s previously stated objection, while physically present, to a warrantless search is a continuing assertion of Fourth Amendment rights which cannot be overridden by a co-tenant.