Georgia v. Randolph addresses which scenario?

• A. A consenting occupant's permission is invalid if the other occupant is present and objects
• B. A search may proceed with consent from one occupant even if the other objects
• C. A search may proceed without consent if the occupant is in the car
• D. Consent from the owner is always enough

Answer: (A)

When two people share a home, each has a protected right to exclude others. Georgia v. Randolph holds that if one occupant consents to a search but the other occupant is present and clearly objects, the police cannot rely on the consenting person’s permission. The objecting occupant’s right overrides the consent, so the search is unlawful unless there’s consent from both occupants or another legal basis (like probable cause or a warrant). If the objecting occupant isn’t present or doesn’t object, the consent can still be valid. This is precisely the scenario where a consenting occupant’s permission is invalid when the other occupant is present and objects.