W.D.Mich.: No apparent authority in a person without a key to the property who was locked out

The officers encouraged the search by a private person, and that made the search a government search. “[C]ommon authority does not depend on ‘property rights,’ but derives from the ‘mutual use of the property by persons generally having joint access or control for most purposes, so that it is reasonable to recognize that any of the co-inhabitants has the right to permit the inspection in his own right and that the others have assumed the risk that one of their number might permit the common area to be searched.’ United States v. Waller, 426 F.3d 838, 845 (6th Cir. 2005) (quoting United States v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164, 171 (1974)).” The government failed in its burden of showing by a preponderance of the evidence that the person who consented had actual authority. He had no key to enter and was locked out. United States v. Van Dyke, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47652 (W.D. Mich. May 14, 2010).

Former officer of a corporation that was searched under a warrant could not show a reasonable expectation of privacy (“standing”) in the place searched. He was a legal officer of the corporation, but he did not use the offices searched. United States v. Renzi, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47621 (D. Ariz. April 16, 2010).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.