Keep Closed Containers Closed: Resolving the Circuit Split in Favor of Individual Privacy

• Author: Brian D. Jones
• Position: J.D. Candidate, The University of Iowa College of Law, 2012
• Pages: 303-325

303

Keep Closed Containers Closed:

Resolving the Circuit Split in Favor of

Individual Privacy

Brian D. Jones

ABSTRACT: The circuits are currently split on the issue of the scope of

apparent-authority consent regarding the searches of closed containers.

Specifically, the circuits disagree about what measures law-enforcement

officers should be required to take to determine ownership of a closed

container when, while conducting a search pursuant to consent, the

circumstances are ambiguous as to whether the consenter actually owns the

closed container. Because the Sixth Circuit’s approach provides the most

Fourth Amendment protection and is most faithful to Supreme Court

precedent, the Court should resolve the current split by adopting the Sixth

Circuit’s approach.

I.INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 305

II.FOURTH AMENDMENT HISTORY AND THE CONSENT EXCEPTION .......... 306

A.CONSENT GENERALLY ....................................................................... 307

1.Voluntariness .......................................................................... 308

2.Actual Authority ..................................................................... 309

3.Apparent Authority ................................................................ 309

B.CLOSED-CONTAINER SEARCHES:DISTINGUISHING OWNER AND

CONSENTER ..................................................................................... 311

III.CIRCUITS’TESTS AND VARYING LEVELS OF PROTECTION....................... 311

A.SIXTH CIRCUIT’S MOST PROTECTIVE TEST IN UNITED STATES V.

TAYLOR:UNDERLYING FACTS AND DISPOSITION ................................ 313

B.TEST AND APPLICATION .................................................................... 314

C.SEVENTH CIRCUIT’S LESS PROTECTIVE TEST IN UNITED STATES V.

MELGAR:UNDERLYING FACTS AND DISPOSITION ............................... 315

J.D. Candidate, The University of Iowa College of Law, 2012; B.S., Washington

University in Saint Louis, 2009. I thank the editors of Volumes 96 and 97 for improving my

Note; my parents for their unending support; and my wife Kate for her patience and

encouragement.

304 IOWA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 97:303

D.TEST AND APPLICATION .................................................................... 316

E.SECOND CIRCUIT’S LEAST PROTECTIVE TEST IN UNITED STATES V.

SNYPE:UNDERLYING FACTS AND DISPOSITION ................................... 316

F.TEST AND APPLICATION .................................................................... 317

IV.THE SUPREME COURT SHOULD RESOLVE THE SPLIT BY ADOPTING

THE SIXTH CIRCUIT’S MOST PROTECTIVE TEST .................................... 318

A.THE SIXTH CIRCUIT’S TEST IS MOST COMPATIBLE WITH THE

SUPREME COURT’S DECISION INILLINOIS V.RODRIGUEZ .................. 319

B.THE SIXTH CIRCUIT’S TEST PROVIDES A WORKABLE BRIGHT-LINE

RULE ............................................................................................... 320

C.THE SEVENTH AND SECOND CIRCUITS’TESTS DO NOT ADEQUATELY

PROTECT INDIVIDUALS’FOURTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS AND ALLOW

FOR ABUSE BY LAW ENFORCEMENT .................................................... 321

D.ASALINAS-CANO COMPROMISE ....................................................... 324

V.CONCLUSION ......................................................................................... 325