W.D.La.: No reasonable expectation of privacy in a stolen car

“Barnes, as the possessor of a stolen vehicle, had no legitimate expectation of privacy in the vehicle. His challenge to the search fails on this ground alone. [¶] In addition, it should be noted that, even if Barnes did have standing to challenge the search, which he does not, the inventory search of the vehicle, following the discovery that the vehicle was stolen and the proper and legitimate arrest of the defendant, was a valid exception to the warrant requirement and in no way violated Barnes’ rights. Therefore, even if there were standing, the defendant’s motion should be denied.” United States v. Barnes, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21959 (W.D.La. Feb. 17, 2016), adopted 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21957 (W.D. La. Feb. 23, 2016). Accord: United States v. Avagyan, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22231 (E.D. Va. Feb. 22, 2016).

The officer developed reasonable suspicion from conversing with the occupants of the vehicle such that their stories didn’t match about anything and then they contradicted themselves on further questioning. United States v. Quiroga, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21711 (D.Neb. Feb. 22, 2016),* R&R 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176370 (D. Neb. Dec. 30, 2015).*