OH2: Def’s denial of possessory interest in car at suppression hearing denies him standing

“During the suppression hearing, Williamson specifically disclaimed a possessory interest in the Chrysler 300” so he didn’t have standing. State v. Williamson, 2017-Ohio-7098, 2017 Ohio App. LEXIS 3217 (2d Dist. Aug. 4, 2017). (Shades of Rawlings v. Kentucky where the defendant at the suppression hearing on a throwaway question admitted he had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the woman’s purse he stashed his drugs in.)

This entry was posted in Standing. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.