Walls v. Commonwealth

Charles Walls was convicted of grand larceny and of breaking and entering with intent to commit larceny. On appeal he contends that evidence found in his residence by police officers, who entered without a warrant, should have been suppressed as the product of an illegal search. The Commonwealth contends that the officers entered Walls residence with implied consent or by invitation. It further argues that the subsequent search was valid because it was consented to by Walls fiancee, Joyce Fox, who appeared to be sharing the residence with him. We find that the officers entry was in violation of the Fourth Amendment and that because Foxs consent was obtained as a result of the illegal entry, it was ineffective to validate the search. Because there was no valid consent for the search, no warrant and no recognized exception to justify a warrantless search, all evidence obtained during the search must be suppressed. We further find that the courts error in admitting these items was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and we, therefore, reverse.