Skip to content
Name: In re Rudy F.
Case #: B166700
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 04/21/2004
Summary

A minor residing with his sister has standing to challenge a search of his sister’s bedroom. The minor here lived with his adult sister. Pursuant to the consent of the sister’s boyfriend, deputies searched the house, including the room shared by the sister and her boyfriend. Under the mattress in that room, deputies found three guns, all connected to the minor. The court below found that the consent to the search was not valid, but further found that the minor had no standing to raise a challenge to the search. The Court of Appeal reversed, holding that a child who resides with his family has standing to challenge a search of his home that yields evidence used against him, even if the evidence is seized from the bedroom of a parent or guardian. The court distinguished standing cases involving overnight guests and held that parsing out the areas of the home to determine the minor’s right of access to each area would undermine the historic constitutional significance of the home. The court also rejected the Attorney General’s inevitable discovery argument, holding that the prosecution bears the burden of establishing inevitable discovery and did not meet that burden in this case.