The mere fact the car was rented provided no indication to the officer that the defendant wasn’t permitted to drive it, thus no reasonable suspicion from that. Thus, the stop was unreasonably extended without reasonable suspicion. When the detention is unreasonably prolonged, it affects the passengers, too. Thus, the state’s standing argument misses the mark. The impoundment of the vehicle was thus unjustified and unreasonable. Commonwealth v. Tavares, 2019 Mass. LEXIS 430 (July 26, 2019).
Defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in a cell phone seized off another person. United States v. Hamlett, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125248 (D. Conn. July 26, 2019).*