Reference no: EM133241494

Case: In order to approach this thoroughly, organize your responses by identifying all the issues raised in the fact pattern (even those beyond the scope of the specific question), citing the rules that apply to them, analyzing the facts of the case in light of the rules and drawing your conclusion. Which is called the "IRAC" method.

An officer suspects that Dave is selling pirated DVD movies. (Dave sells to the old schoolers who collect and still love DVDs.) He walks up a sidewalk to Dave's front door, knocks, and when Dave's wife answers, the officer explains his suspicions and asks to search the house. When she says that she is not sure she should let him, he responds, "Well I can always apply for a search warrant", although he is unsure whether he has probable cause to support a warrant. Dave's wife reluctantly says that he can go ahead and search the house. He searches the interior of the house and then the back deck and finds nothing. From the deck, he sees dog kennel 40 feet from the house. He searches that also and finds 100 copies of Judas and the Black Messiah that are obviously pirated. Dave is charged and moves suppress the DVD's (have them excluded from evidence).

Question 1: Is Dave's wife's consent sufficient to support the search?

Question 2: Is there any theory other than consent on which the search of the kennel may be valid?