M.D.Fla.: Def had standing in his father’s home as a regular occasional guest with a key

The property searched was defendant’s father’s but he occasionally stayed there and had a key. On the day in question, police saw him going in. While he has standing, he loses on the merits of probable cause for the search and the good faith exception. United States v. Perkins, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132915 (M.D. Fla. July 14, 2025):

The question here is whether the Defendant’s statement to law enforcement officers collecting his DNA on August 21, 2024, that he does not reside at or “stay” at the residence is enough to deny standing considering the other evidence. The Court finds that the Defendant’s denial does not eliminate his standing. First, the Defendant’s claim that he does not live at the residence is not inconsistent with having control over the property that would give him standing. One does not need to be a full-time resident to challenge a search. Second, the Defendant’s statement that he does not “stay” there is too vague to have much meaning. Lastly, the testimony of Mr. Hudson and the video evidence of the Defendant entering the home with a key, along with proof of occupancy, show that the Defendant is more than just an overnight guest. He stored personal items, such as his birth certificate and passport, in his room, entered the residence regularly and freely, stayed overnight on occasion, and could exclude others. In short, the Defendant has a reasonable expectation of privacy in the house and its surroundings and has standing to contest the search warrant. See California v. Ciraolo, 476 U.S. 207, 212-13, (1986) (“The protection afforded the curtilage is essentially a protection of families and personal privacy in an area intimately linked to the home.”).

This entry was posted in Standing. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.