{"id":3944,"date":"2010-04-02T06:17:54","date_gmt":"2010-03-12T09:31:17","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2010-03-12T09:39:39","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=3944","title":{"rendered":"MA: Reasonable expectation of privacy found in a homeless shelter"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>A juvenile and his mother living in a homeless shelter (&#8220;transitional family shelter&#8221;) had a reasonable expectation in their living quarters. It wasn&#8217;t palatial, but it was their home. <a href=\"http:\/\/weblinks.westlaw.com\/result\/default.aspx?action=Search&amp;cnt=DOC&amp;db=MA-ORSLIP&amp;eq=search&amp;fmqv=c&amp;fn=_top&amp;method=TNC&amp;n=3&amp;origin=Search&amp;query=TO%28ALLSCT+ALLSCTRS+ALLSCTOJ%29&amp;rlt=CLID_QRYRLT1888057239123&amp;rltdb=CLID_DB4436557239123&amp;rlti=1&amp;rp=%2Fsearch%2Fdefault.wl&amp;rs=MAOR1.0&amp;service=Search&amp;sp=MassOF-1001&amp;srch=TRUE&amp;ss=CNT&amp;sskey=CLID_SSSA6039657239123&amp;sv=Split&amp;vr=1.0\">Commonwealth v. Porter P.<\/a>, 456 Mass. 254 (March 11, 2010), rev&#8217;g Commonwealth v. Porter P., 73 Mass. App. Ct. 85, 895 N.E.2d 775 (2008):<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>The room that the juvenile and his mother shared at the shelter was a transitional living space, but it was nonetheless their home. The juvenile slept and kept his  belongings in the room. He and his mother possessed a key to the room, allowing them the degree of privacy inherent in a locked door. The fact that he did not own the room, that he was limited in his use of the room, and that shelter staff members had a master key and could enter the room &#8220;for professional business purposes&#8221; does not diminish the legitimacy of his privacy interest in the room. The same can be said of a patron of a hotel or a tenant in a boarding house, both of whom enjoy a reasonable expectation of privacy in their rooms. See Stoner v. California, 376 U.S. 483 (1964) (hotel patron); McDonald v. United States, 335 U.S. 451 (1948) (boarding house tenant). Indeed, in Minnesota v. Olson, 495 U.S. 91, 98-100 (1990), the United States Supreme Court made clear that a guest who stays but one night in a friend&#8217;s home &#8212; with or without a key, and with or without paying rent &#8212; &#8220;has a legitimate expectation of privacy in his host&#8217;s home.&#8221; Id. at 98. &#8220;That the guest has a host who has ultimate control of the house is not inconsistent with the guest having a legitimate expectation of privacy&#8221; in the home. Id. at 99. In short, regardless of whether the juvenile resided in a palatial mansion or a single room in a transitional shelter, regardless of whether he owned the residence or was allowed to remain without paying rent, and regardless of whether his landlord or shelter director had a master key and could enter to ensure that he was abiding by the rules of the house, the juvenile had a reasonable expectation of privacy in his home.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>[Quantifying the quality of the home can be risky business under the Fourth Amendment. Cases have found a reasonable expectation of privacy in a tent. Other courts have found a reasonable expectation of privacy in cardboard box &#8220;homes&#8221; of the homeless. The opinion also discusses three state cases rejecting apparent authority to consent under state constitutional law which it declines to follow.]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=3944\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3944","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3944","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=3944"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3944\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=3944"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=3944"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=3944"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}