# People v. Goforth

> Michigan Court of Appeals · May 22, 1997 · 222 Mich. App. 306

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9660351

## Case

- **Full name:** People v. Goforth
- **Court:** Michigan Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** May 22, 1997
- **Citations:** 222 Mich. App. 306; 564 N.W.2d 526
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by O'Connell
- **Judges:** O'Connell, Markman, Talbot
- **Cited by:** 27 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9660351

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that, although son was eighteen years old and paid rent, mother could consent to search of son’s bedroom, where nothing suggested mother lacked access to room

## Opinion text

O’Connell, P.J.
(concurring). I concur with the majority, but write separately to emphasize that, excepting the most unusual of situations, a parent always has the right to consent to the search of the bedroom of a child residing with that parent. As stated in LaFave & Israel, Criminal Procedure (2d ed), § 3.10(e), p 242:
If a son or daughter, whether or not still a minor, is residing in the home of the parents, generally it is within the authority of the father or mother to consent to a police search of that home which will be effective against the offspring. This is unquestionably so as to areas of common usage, and is also true of the bedroom of the son or daughter when a parent has ready access for purposes of cleaning it or when because of the minority of the offspring the parent is still exercising parental authority.
In other words, “[t]he parent’s rights are ‘superior to the rights of children who live in the house,’ which means . . . that the parent’s consent would be effective even when the child was present and objecting.” LaFave, 3 Search and Seizure (3d ed), § 8.4(b), p 768.
In the present case, defendant, though not a minor, resided with his mother, who had “ready access” to *318 clean his room and to gather laundry. Unquestionably, the mother could validly consent to the search.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9660351. Public record. Not legal advice.