With this case in mind, I have another scenario to run by all of you who might reply; "He got weed!!"

An officer goes to a married or common law couple's residence on a verbal domestic dispute.
They're just not getting along and she says "he got weed!!" You ask for consent, she says yes, he says hell no! Can we secure the scene by having him leave or observing him while a search warrant is drafted?

I don't think there is any problem with that approach. Prior cases suggest that would be the proper approach. The justification, of course, is the likely destruction of evidence should officers not secure the scene. And, if there is any evidence that there are other people in the home, the officer could probably do a walk through to make sure nothing is going wrong.

What if the wife offers to go get the MJ and bring it to the officer, videotaping its recovery on her cell phone. What should the officer say?

I would absolutely not want her to go after it herself - (1) she's moving evidence (even if she is recording it); (2) she has no legal authority to possess it, and there'd be NO QUESTION *she* was possessing it then; and (3) (along the same lines as 1&2) where the weed is located could be a vital part of proving up affirmative links to the guy.

Just my $2 worth (inflation, ya know).

Other than possible chain of custody issues, your whole case rests on the credibility of the fetching party. And as fleur pointed out, you've immediately eliminated any possibility of objective link evidence.

What if the officer just asked if he could use the restroom? Would the wife have authority to permit such an entrance over the objection of the husband? For persons other than police, could the husband demand criminal trespass charges for people who enter with the wife but not the husband's permission?

This is a bad case that will not hold up well in future scenarios. It is, as the dissent points out, founded upon poor sociological logic.

Would the outcome change if the Texas Property Code gave husband and wife joint control over marital property. Oh, wait, it already does.