## Facts

- Pennsville police investigated a reported street shooting in the Deepwater section of town and received information identifying Michael W. Lamb as the shooter.
- Officers went, without a warrant, to the home where Lamb was reportedly staying with his mother and stepfather.
- Lamb’s stepfather met the officers and emphatically refused to allow police onto the property or into the house.
- While officers were at the home, Lamb’s girlfriend came to the door, left the house, confirmed Lamb’s presence inside, and provided information that supplied probable cause to arrest Lamb.
- After the exchange with police, the stepfather agreed to leave the home and was no longer on the premises.
- Soon afterward, Lamb came out of the house at his mother’s insistence and was arrested.
- Lamb’s mother remained inside the home with three young children; she was aware there was a loaded firearm in the residence.
- After Lamb and the stepfather were no longer present, the mother gave police permission to enter and to search the room Lamb and his girlfriend had been using.
- During the consent search, officers found a loaded handgun and ammunition similar to that used in the earlier shooting.
- Lamb was later charged with weapons and related offenses and moved to suppress the gun and ammunition as the product of an unconstitutional search.

## Issues

1. Whether a warrantless search based on a co-occupant’s consent is valid when another co-occupant previously objected but is not physically present when consent is later given.
2. Whether, under the totality of the circumstances, Lamb’s mother gave knowing and voluntary consent to search the room Lamb was using.
3. Whether Article I, Paragraph 7 of the New Jersey Constitution required suppression even if the search was permissible under the Fourth Amendment.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of New Jersey affirmed the denial of Lamb’s motion to suppress and affirmed the judgment below.
- The court held that Lamb’s mother had authority as a resident to consent to a search of the room Lamb and his girlfriend were staying in.
- The court concluded the mother’s consent was knowing and voluntary under the totality of the circumstances.
- The stepfather’s earlier objection did not bar the later search because his objection was no longer effective once he was not physically present when the mother granted consent.
- The court relied on federal consent-search doctrine, including the rule that a present co-occupant’s consent can be effective when the objecting occupant is lawfully absent, and it declined to impose a different result under the New Jersey Constitution on these facts.

## Legal Principles

- Warrantless searches of a home are presumptively unreasonable; the State must show a recognized exception to the warrant requirement.
- Voluntary consent is an exception to the warrant requirement; voluntariness is assessed from the totality of the circumstances.
- A resident with common authority over premises (or over a shared area) may consent to a search of that area.
- When a co-occupant objects but is not physically present at the time another co-occupant gives consent, the earlier objection does not control, so long as the objector’s absence is lawful and not used as a pretext to avoid an objection.
- New Jersey applied the consent-search framework consistently with the Fourth Amendment and did not require suppression under Article I, Paragraph 7 based on the record in this case.

## Conclusion

State v. Lamb held that police could rely on the knowing and voluntary consent of Lamb’s mother to search the bedroom Lamb had been using after Lamb and his stepfather were no longer physically present, even though the stepfather had previously refused entry; because the mother’s consent was valid and effective once the objector was absent, the handgun and ammunition discovered during the limited consent search were admissible under both the Fourth Amendment and the New Jersey Constitution.


State v. Lamb, 95 A.3d 123 (2014)