California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Tackwell, A136397 (Cal. App. 2014):
4. This statement must be qualified to account for cases holding that one occupant of a home cannot give permission for an intruder to enter in order to commit a felony against a second occupant. (See People v. Sears (1965) 62 Cal.2d 737, overruled on other grounds in People v. Cahill (1993) 5 Cal.4th 478, 510, fn. 17; People v. Clayton (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 418.) Further, as discussed below, a minor "occupant" in her parent's home does not have the same unconditional possessory right to allow others to enter the home as her parent does.
5. Fourth Amendment jurisprudence involves " ' " 'balancing [a search's] intrusion on the individual's Fourth Amendment interests against its promotion of legitimate governmental interests.' " ' " (People v. Robinson (2010) 47 Cal.4th 1104, 1120, quoting Vernonia School Dist. 47J v. Acton (1995) 515 U.S. 646, 652-653.) Entry for purposes of committing a felony involves no countervailing social benefits so there is less reason to construe consent to such entry liberally.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.