Legal Question in Criminal Law in California

recently while my parents were vacationing, they left me and my boyfriend at their house to house sit/ pet sit. while i took a short trip to grocery store, my boyfriend stayed alone at the home. He had full permission to be their with even a key. While i was grocery shopping he took the outside to potty and a nieghbor saw him, didnt reconize him thought it looked suspicious and called the sherriffs on him. When i returned from the store i was appalled to find 2 sherriffs units in my drive way and my house torn apart. my boyfriend, was on active parole, and i understand they had every right to search his person, but me and certainly not my family have any legal issues that would allow them to enter and tear up our residance. My boyfriends adress is not even registered or connected to my parents home. Why didn't they just take him outside and search his person? what right did they have to enter my parents residance with no legal cause or warrant and tear up our house while i was acrossed the street grocery shopping? Didn't they need permission from me to enter the residance? is this illegal search and siezure or is it standard to intrude on a law abiding citizen's home and rip it up when the resident is not even home.


Asked on 8/20/09, 4:44 am

1 Answer from Attorneys
Robert Marshall Law Office of Robert L, Marshall

The search might be justified under a couple of theories.

The neighbor called because some strange guy was relieving himself in a place visible to the public. Since you mention the possibility that the officers could have taken your boyfriend outside to search him, I assume he was back in the house when the police arrived and identified himself as a parolee.

What did he say? Did he have any proof he had permission to be there? At the very least, the cops would probably have been justified in making a protective sweep through the house to see if anybody else was hiding in your home.. or, for that matter, tied up in the back of the house. Most people would find that reasonable if the police contacted a parolee in their home who could not provide satisfactory proof that he had permission to be there.

A protective sweep would allow them to look in any place a person might be hiding.

Your boyfriend's parole terms also require him to submit any place under his control, not just his residence, to warrantless searches. He was alone in the house, had a key, and was free to come and go as he pleased, so he was in control of the house. (More than one person can be in control of a home at the same time.) The police were probably justified in conducting a parole search on those grounds.

People who live with parolees (or allow them unrestricted access to their homes) have a reduced expectation of privacy. His search terms would extend to any common area of the home, except areas that were off limits to him.

The answer might be different if you had been present and told the officers he was only a temporary guest, not an overnight guest, and was only there to have dinner or watch TV.

Of course, the whole situation could have been avoided if your boyfriend had just used the bathroom like everyone else.

Read more
Answered on 8/21/09, 3:51 pm


Related Questions & Answers

More Criminal Law questions and answers in California