In Brown v. Texas, 856 S.W.2d 177 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993), the defendant called police and reported having discovered his wife dead in the garage. Upon arriving, police searched the detached garage and the home, based upon the information provided by appellant. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals held: when a crime is reported to the police by an individual who owns or controls the premises to which the police are summoned, and that individual either states or suggests that it was committed by a third person, he or she implicitly consents to a search of the premises reasonably related to the routine investigation of the offense and the identification of the perpetrator. As long as the individual is not a suspect in the case or does nothing to revoke his consent, the police may search the premises for these purposes, and evidence obtained thereby is admissible. This implied consent is valid only for the initial investigation conducted at the scene and does not carry over to future visits to the scene. Id. at 182. See also: State v. Fleischman, 157 Ariz. 11, 754 P.2d 340 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988)(by reporting to police that his wife had been killed in their restaurant, the defendant, who was not a suspect at the time, implicitly consented to the search of the restaurant and authorized the subsequent investigation); State v. Fredette, 411 A.2d 65 (Me. 1979)(defendant consented to the search of her home where she called police, reported that her husband had been shot and, through her conduct, cooperated, approved and encouraged the police in their search); Kelly v. State, 75 Wis. 2d 303, 249 N.W.2d 800 (Wis. 1977)(defendant consented to search of premises where she reported to police that the deceased had been shot and that she had been in another room of the house at the time of the shooting).