In what circumstances will a court grant a search warrant under section 995 of the California Probation Act for the home of a probationer?

In our case, while the magistrate found that the probationer was the leaseholder, there was no evidence of a family relationship or equivalent familiarity between the probationer and defendant. The probationer did not expressly consent to searching defendant's bedroom or otherwise manifest the same level of authority over the converted garage as did the mother in Daniels. We conclude that the prosecution did not present sufficient evidence to justify a warrantless search or an objectively reasonable belief that the probationer had authority over the contents of either the drawers or the purse in defendant's bedroom. We see no basis for upholding the denial of the section 995 motion and conclude that it should have been granted. (See People v. Lilienthal (1978) 22 Cal.3d 891, 897, 150 Cal.Rptr. 910, 587 P.2d 706 [denial of section 995 motion may be upheld if there is substantial legally obtained evidence to support the information....].)