Category Archives: Standing

SC: Def had no standing to contest police entry onto the porch where he was hanging out, allegedly dealing drugs

Officers watched the porch of Apartment 122 and observed five men 10:00-10:30 pm, and five cars came up and one would go to the cars and do what appeared to be a hand-to-hand transaction. Finally, the officers moved to the … Continue reading →

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, Burden of proof, Consent, Standing | Comments Off on SC: Def had no standing to contest police entry onto the porch where he was hanging out, allegedly dealing drugs

CA5: Defendant didn’t show standing in another person’s car for a GPS issue

Defendant didn’t show standing in another person’s car for a GPS issue. United States v. Vo, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 20953 (5th Cir. November 3, 2014).* The record supports that the consent was voluntary. United States v. Vega, 2014 U.S. … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, GPS / Tracking Data, Plain view, feel, smell, Standing | Comments Off on CA5: Defendant didn’t show standing in another person’s car for a GPS issue

E.D.Va.: Body cam showed consent

The officers’ body cams showed that defendant consented to the entry into his hotel room. Officers were walking by the room, not even looking for defendant, and they smelled marijuana. They determined it must be coming from defendant’s room, so … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Informational privacy, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on E.D.Va.: Body cam showed consent

MD: Drug deal in defendant’s vestibule was in open view and opening glass door was by exigency

Remembering that there is a difference between plain view and open view, the officers saw defendant selling cocaine in the vestibule between a glass door and the front door of his house. When the police approached, they could see the … Continue reading →

Posted in Apparent authority, Consent, Plain view, feel, smell, Standing | Comments Off on MD: Drug deal in defendant’s vestibule was in open view and opening glass door was by exigency

OH2: Def’s position in a forfeiture on a piece of property was estoppel on standing in a criminal case

Judicial estoppel: Defendant had no standing in a video camera seized during a drug raid that had a video of him having sex with an impaired victim where he denied in a separate forfeiture proceeding that the camera was his. … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Drug or alcohol testing, Forfeiture, Inventory, Standing | Comments Off on OH2: Def’s position in a forfeiture on a piece of property was estoppel on standing in a criminal case

CO: While defendant was not an authorized driver of a rental car, she had standing in her own packages in the car

Although defendant was not an authorized driver of the rental car stopped by police for a traffic violation, defendant had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the gift-wrapped packages in that car, which she continually asserted were hers and were … Continue reading →

Posted in Excessive force, Standing | Comments Off on CO: While defendant was not an authorized driver of a rental car, she had standing in her own packages in the car

OR: Where defendant was to be booked and released, jail search was unreasonable

Search at jail wasn’t shown to be necessary or inevitable, and state conceded error (decided under state constitution). Defendant likely would have been booked and released. State v. Moulton, 2014 Ore. App. LEXIS 1372 (October 8, 2014).* Defendant’s refusal to … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Drug or alcohol testing, Special needs, Standing | Comments Off on OR: Where defendant was to be booked and released, jail search was unreasonable

OH9: Officers walking up on both sides of a parked vehicle wasn’t a “stop”

Two officers walked up on an already parked vehicle, one on each side. The officer testified that he’d be “pretty upset” if the defendant drove off, but he was actually free to leave. Therefore, it was not a stop, and … Continue reading →

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Seizure, Standing | Comments Off on OH9: Officers walking up on both sides of a parked vehicle wasn’t a “stop”

GA: The mere presence of some papers of the defendant in the place searched doesn’t confer standing

The mere presence of some papers of the defendant in the place searched doesn’t confer standing. There was no testimony that he was otherwise connected to the property as owner, lessee, or guest. “The mere presence of miscellaneous papers bearing … Continue reading →

Posted in Informant hearsay, Standing | Comments Off on GA: The mere presence of some papers of the defendant in the place searched doesn’t confer standing

CA7: Def’s car with his phone in it parked repeatedly outside a house supported PC to search that place

The repeated presence of defendant’s car and cell phone at the place searched under the warrant added to the probable cause that that was a place where evidence could be found. It wasn’t misleading to the USMJ to not tell … Continue reading →

Posted in Probable cause, Standing | Comments Off on CA7: Def’s car with his phone in it parked repeatedly outside a house supported PC to search that place

CA7: A defendant violating parole doesn’t lack all standing just because he crosses a state line violating his parole

A defendant violating parole doesn’t lack all standing just because he crosses a state line violating his parole. United States v. Walton, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 15570 (7th Cir. August 13, 2014):

Posted in Probation / Parole search, Standing | Comments Off on CA7: A defendant violating parole doesn’t lack all standing just because he crosses a state line violating his parole

E.D.Mich.: Standing shown in a borrowed rental car

Standing found under the totality of the circumstances in a borrowed rented car, but then the defendant looses on the merits because there was probable cause. United States v. Warren, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111690 (E.D. Mich. August 13, 2014): … Continue reading →

Posted in Standing | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: Standing shown in a borrowed rental car

C.D.Ill.: One doesn’t have standing in a cell phone that’s not his

Defendant didn’t have standing to challenge the search of a cell phone that he denied was his, but it was covered under the search warrant anyway and circuit authority authorized warrrantless searches before Riley. United States v. Brown, 2014 U.S. … Continue reading →

Posted in Cell phones, Consent, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on C.D.Ill.: One doesn’t have standing in a cell phone that’s not his

D.Ariz.: Passenger had standing: girlfriend’s car, and they were on vacation together

Defendant’s girlfriend owned the car, and they were traveling together on vacation. Given all the facts, this passenger had standing and a reasonable expectation of privacy that society would recognize and could exclude others from the car. United States v. … Continue reading →

Posted in Inventory, Reasonable expectation of privacy, Standing | Comments Off on D.Ariz.: Passenger had standing: girlfriend’s car, and they were on vacation together

CA6: No RS for a frisk; gov’t waived standing in DC and can’t argue it on appeal

There was a basis for the stop, but there was none for a frisk, and the district court erred in concluding otherwise. Also, the government waive a standing argument in the district court and it can’t raise it on appeal. … Continue reading →

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Probable cause, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on CA6: No RS for a frisk; gov’t waived standing in DC and can’t argue it on appeal

N.D.Cal.: Police observation of a controlled buy is justification for a traffic stop

Police observation of a controlled buy is justification for a traffic stop. United States v. Cooper, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105617 (N.D. Cal. July 31, 2014).* D.C. helped set up defendant’s computer system, and defendant was downloading child pornography. The … Continue reading →

Posted in Ineffective assistance, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on N.D.Cal.: Police observation of a controlled buy is justification for a traffic stop

D.N.J.: Merely holding a camera bag getting into a car doesn’t give standing when the car was later stopped without some ownership interest

Defendant was seen holding a blue camera bag as he entered a car that was later stopped. Holding the bag then doesn’t give standing because he later did not assert an ownership interest in it. United States v. Valle-Irizarry, 2014 … Continue reading →

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on D.N.J.: Merely holding a camera bag getting into a car doesn’t give standing when the car was later stopped without some ownership interest

E.D.Mich.: Drug and firearm SW turned up surveillance system; looking at images on camera was reasonable; CP found

Officers had a drug and firearms search warrant, and found a surveillance system inside with a “control room.” They looked on the camera screen and immediately saw child pornography. They obtained a second warrant for that. The view of the … Continue reading →

Posted in Reasonable suspicion, Standing, Warrant execution | Comments Off on E.D.Mich.: Drug and firearm SW turned up surveillance system; looking at images on camera was reasonable; CP found

CA11: Defendant lacked standing on the curtilage of a house he was often a guest in when he was fleeing police and stopped in front yard

Defendant was riding a bicycle on the wrong side of the street, and the police recognized him from prior investigations, so they followed and attempted to stop him. He pedelled faster and went to house and entered a gate to … Continue reading →

Posted in Curtilage, Ineffective assistance, Probable cause, Standing | Comments Off on CA11: Defendant lacked standing on the curtilage of a house he was often a guest in when he was fleeing police and stopped in front yard

OH9: Mistake of law on where car needed to stop justified suppressing the stop

Officer’s mistake of law that a driver had to stop only at a stop line and not before made the stop unreasonable. State v. Drushal, 2014-Ohio-3088, 2014 Ohio App. LEXIS 3020 (9th Dist. July 14, 2014).* [Will Heien v. North … Continue reading →

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Emergency / exigency, Reasonable suspicion, Standing | Comments Off on OH9: Mistake of law on where car needed to stop justified suppressing the stop