D.S.D.: If def testifies to show standing, he can be asked about his association with the drugs found

If defendant testifies at the suppression hearing to show his reasonable expectation of privacy, he opens the door to being asked about whether the drugs were his and his full association with the room [despite Simmons, which is not even mentioned]. He cannot be asked about criminal history [despite impeachment for prior conviction?]. United States v. Story, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126166 (D.S.D. June 4, 2026):

It would also be proper for the government to question Mr. Story about the drugs found in Room 224. At the suppression hearing, defense counsel indicated that if Mr. Story took the stand, he would testify about how he paid for the room, when he arrived, whether he had been there before, whether he requested a late checkout, and whether he had previously requested late checkouts. See Docket 72 at 97-98. This testimony concerns Mr. Story’s claim of a reasonable expectation of privacy in Room 224 and would thus open the door to cross-examination about whether the items, including the drugs, in the room rented by Ms. DuBray belonged to him. See United States v. Williams, 754 F.2d 672, 676 (6th Cir. 1985) (concluding that government could ask defendant questions about whether he knew he was carrying drugs based on his direct testimony). Notably, while Magistrate Judge Wollmann stated that the government would be permitted to question Mr. Story, should he testify, about his drug use and the drugs found in Room 224, she specifically barred the government from inquiring about Mr. Story’s other criminal behavior, associates he may have, and anything involving a conspiracy or possession with intent to distribute. Docket 72 at 100-01.

This entry was posted in Admissibility of evidence. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.