Defendant was given standing in his mother’s home, even though he did not live there full time. His uncle also lived there, and he had apparent authority and “free agency” to consent to a search of the premises. United States v. Anderson, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 134148 (E.D. Mo. July 24, 2017). On standing:
The record before the Court establishes that Anderson did not live full time at his mother’s Fox Haven address. Yet Anderson was more than a mere social guest, he stayed at the Fox Haven address periodically, used the laundry facilities there, and kept and cared for his dogs there. Anderson was free to come and go as he pleased at the Fox Haven home. Anderson and his property were physically present at the premises when the police arrived on August 19, 2016. Other evidence suggests, however, that Anderson also lived with his girlfriend, including at an apartment. The question of standing, therefore, is close. On balance, the undersigned concludes that Anderson offered sufficient facts for the Court to conclude that he has standing to challenge the Fox Haven search, even though he did not live there fulltime.