Gregg Carl Baird, Appellant v. the State of Texas

Summary

The Court affirmed the trial court's denial of the appellant's motion to suppress, holding that the dog sitter had the appellant's apparent consent to enter the bedroom and use the computer, and therefore the evidence was admissible. The Court interpreted "apparent" in the Penal Code to mean a clear and manifest assent, not a merely seeming one, and applied this construction to the facts. A dissent argued the opposite, and a concurrence agreed with the majority's definition of apparent consent.