Category Archives: Standing

N.D.Ill.: Collins v. Virginia doesn’t apply to a shared parking area which is not curtilage

Collins v. Virginia does not apply to shared parking areas which are not curtilage. “United States v. Jones, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 16409 (2d Cir. June 19, 2018), Jones’s vehicle was parked in a parking lot behind the multi-family building … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Curtilage, Standing, Suppression hearings | Comments Off on N.D.Ill.: Collins v. Virginia doesn’t apply to a shared parking area which is not curtilage

N.D.W.Va.: No standing in car where permission to borrow had been revoked

Defendant had permission to possess and drive a car for a while, but it had been rescinded by the time of the search. Therefore, he lacked standing in the car. United States v. Leclear, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106550 (N.D. … Continue reading

Posted in Emergency / exigency, Probation / Parole search, Standing | Comments Off on N.D.W.Va.: No standing in car where permission to borrow had been revoked

CA6: Removing records from a storage unit as police search your house was an obstruction of justice

Federal agents showed up at defendant’s house with a search warrant for records. They asked if he had other records elsewhere. He lied and said no. He left the house, went to a hardware store to buy boltcutters, and he … Continue reading

Posted in Standing | Comments Off on CA6: Removing records from a storage unit as police search your house was an obstruction of justice

D.S.C.: One innocently driving a stolen vehicle generally doesn’t have standing in it, but he has to show his innocent status

One innocently driving a stolen vehicle generally doesn’t have standing in it. If, however, he innocently buys a stolen vehicle and then he’s stopped in it, it’s his burden to show that he was an innocent purchaser to acquire standing. … Continue reading

Posted in Rule 41(g) / Return of property, Standing | Comments Off on D.S.C.: One innocently driving a stolen vehicle generally doesn’t have standing in it, but he has to show his innocent status

OR: Guest standing is functional to the relationship to the residence and here didn’t cover under the back steps

Guest standing has a functional element. Defendant was a guest in the home of another and their relationship was founded on drugs. While defendant would have standing in the home, he didn’t under the back steps, where, incidentally, he’d been … Continue reading

Posted in Standing, State constitution | Comments Off on OR: Guest standing is functional to the relationship to the residence and here didn’t cover under the back steps

VI: BOLO information shared at beginning of shift satisfies collective knowledge

BOLO information shared with officers at the beginning of their shift qualifies as collective knowledge. Emanuel v. People, 2018 V.I. Supreme LEXIS 10 (June 15, 2018) (relying on United States v. Braden, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 115755 (W.D. Tenn. July … Continue reading

Posted in Collective knowledge, Standing | Comments Off on VI: BOLO information shared at beginning of shift satisfies collective knowledge

Cal.1: Electronic search condition on juvenile was unreasonable for possession of a knife and rolling papers at school

The electronic search condition on this juvenile for having a knife, rolling papers, and a lighter in school after a school search was unreasonable. The state says its need to prevent him from procuring more marijuana, but the court disagrees. … Continue reading

Posted in Probation / Parole search, Standing | Comments Off on Cal.1: Electronic search condition on juvenile was unreasonable for possession of a knife and rolling papers at school

CA11: Def counsel wasn’t ineffective for not pursuing suppression motion after def admitted facts showing no standing

Defense counsel wasn’t ineffective for not adequately pursuing defendant’s motion to suppress because defendant admitted to counsel facts after the motion was filed that he had no standing at all. He provided that address as his address, but he was … Continue reading

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Standing | Comments Off on CA11: Def counsel wasn’t ineffective for not pursuing suppression motion after def admitted facts showing no standing

S.D.W.Va.: Def’s admissions on body camera duffle bag wasn’t his denies him standing

“The body camera recording clearly shows that Defendant denied any ownership interest in the duffel bag at the time of the stop. As such, the Court finds that Defendant voluntarily abandoned the duffel bag and therefore lost any reasonable expectation … Continue reading

Posted in Staleness, Standing | Comments Off on S.D.W.Va.: Def’s admissions on body camera duffle bag wasn’t his denies him standing

LA3: Ping order for def’s cell phone was based on exigency

The police ping request to locate defendant’s phone to locate him was based on clear exigent circumstances. Thus, it did not violate the Stored Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2702(c)(4). State v. Malveaux, 2018 La. App. LEXIS 1082 (La. App. … Continue reading

Posted in Cell site location information, Emergency / exigency, Standing | Comments Off on LA3: Ping order for def’s cell phone was based on exigency

D.Minn.: Def lacked standing to challenge SW to YouTube for search history and videos viewed in terrorism case

Defendant was indicted for providing material support to a terrorist organization and planned to travel to Afghanistan, and there were nine search warrants. She communicated with Afghanistan on digital devices and by a gmail account. The search warrants for all … Continue reading

Posted in Computer searches, Standing | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Def lacked standing to challenge SW to YouTube for search history and videos viewed in terrorism case

E.D.Mich.: Def was essentially and admittedly an “innocent bystander” at the place searched and had no standing

This defendant had no standing in the condo that was searched under a search warrant. He produced nothing to show that he had any connection to the property or was a guest with a connection to the premises, even an … Continue reading

Posted in Informant hearsay, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Standing | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: Def was essentially and admittedly an “innocent bystander” at the place searched and had no standing