N.D.Ga.: Motion to suppress of “any Hotmail accounts under his direction, control, use or access” doesn’t show standing

Defendant failed to show standing in his motion to suppress by merely challenging the search of “any Hotmail accounts under his direction, control, use or access” without showing his connection. United States v. Archie, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70620 (N.D.Ga. April 18, 2016):

Here, Defendant’s motion does not identify any relationship between Defendant and the Hotmail accounts. Although Defendant seeks to suppress “any Hotmail accounts under his direction, control, use or access” [Doc. 73 at 1], Defendant does not allege that any of the Hotmail accounts meet that criteria. The motion is simply a boilerplate motion with no analysis or discussion of any relevant facts. In failing to point to any evidence showing who had access to the accounts, the purpose of the accounts, or any other such facts that might shed light on the issue, Defendant has failed to demonstrate that he had a legitimate expectation of privacy in any of the Hotmail accounts. Accordingly, I conclude that Defendant has failed to carry his burden of alleging facts that would establish his standing to challenge the search, and I therefore recommend that the motion be denied on this basis.