M.D.La.: Leaving one’s garage door open is not a waiver of REP or standing

Defendant’s garage door was left open, and that reduced his reasonable expectation of privacy in it, but that didn’t mean he had no standing. By leaving open the garage, defendant didn’t invite the police in, and exigent circumstances or a search warrant are required. There was neither probable cause nor exigent circumstances. United States v. Stewart, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 121964 (M.D. La. July 21, 2018). As to standing:

However, to the extent the United States argues that Defendant must establish a subjective expectation of privacy before “the detectives’ intrusion’ [can] be subject to Fourth Amendment scrutiny,” such argument is misguided. (Doc. 16 at p. 4). The United States seems to assert that where there is reasonable suspicion, a Defendant who leaves the doors to his home open subjects himself to governmental intrusion such that officers are free to enter if they observe incriminating evidence in plain view through that open door.

However, it is axiomatic that the ‘physical entry of the home is the chief evil against which the wording of the Fourth Amendment is directed.”‘ Welsh v. Wisconsin, 466 U.S. 740, 748 (1984) (quoting United States v. U.S. Dist. Court for E. Dist. of Mich., S. Div., 407 U.S. 297, 313 (1972)). And a principal protection against unnecessary intrusions into private dwellings is the warrant requirement imposed by the Fourth Amendment on agents of the government who seek to enter the home for purposes of search or arrest. Id. (citing Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 13-14 (1948)). It follows that, “a search or seizure carried out on a suspect’s premises without a warrant is per se unreasonable, unless the police can show … the presence of exigent circumstances.” Id. (quoting Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443, 474-475 (1971)). Therefore, Defendant has standing to challenge the search.