IA: Defendant claimed no interest in the house searched or what was seized, so he lacked standing

“The flaw in Jackson’s [IAC] argument is that he never claimed any expectation of privacy at his girlfriend’s apartment. In fact, Jackson claimed to have no interest in the apartment, denying he resided there or that any of the possessions within belonged to him. Jackson could not assert standing to challenge a search of a third party’s residence while denying he had any possessory interest to the residence or any of its contents. Therefore, counsel was not ineffective in failing to move to suppress on this basis.” Jackson v. State, 2014 Iowa App. LEXIS 1197 (December 24, 2014).*

A search warrant was issued for defendant’s house, camcorder, and computer. The complainant said she was sexually assaulted in his house, and she also reported that he talked about putting sex videos on his computer. The search of the computer produced child pornography. The warrant was issued with probable cause. Defendant also raised the claim that videos of his ex-wife found on the computer that may have been taken before she was 18 but after their marriage had a constitutional right of privacy. This is rejected essentially without discussion. United States v. Buttercase, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176492 (D. Neb. November 24, 2014).*