AR: Persons napping in a motel room with no shown relationship to renter had no standing

Defendants’ napping in somebody else’s motel room without any explanation of their relationship to the renter of the room did not show an expectation of privacy in the motel room. Anderson v. State, 103 Ark. App. 137, 286 S.W.3d 763 (2008) (4-2):

Examining the facts of this case, the record shows only that appellants were napping during the afternoon in a motel room that was registered to another person and that they had no personal belongings with them in the room. Otherwise, the nature of appellants’ presence in the room and their status vis-a-vis the registered occupant were completely unexplained. Appellants failed to offer any evidence revealing how they came to be present in someone else’s motel room, or how long they had been there. Appellants did not pay for the room, and there was no evidence that they had a key to it. Unlike Owen v. State, supra, there was no evidence introduced to show that appellants knew the registered occupant of the motel room or that they had permission from the registered occupant to stay overnight in the room. And, we cannot assume, without any factual support, that appellants’ presence was somehow authorized simply because they were asleep in the room, as the record could just as easily suggest that appellants surreptitiously gained entry to the room without the knowledge and invitation of the registered occupant.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.