TX: Def had no REP in work truck searched by owner at police request three days after his arrest and expiration of SW

Recognizing that Byrd holds that a person can have standing in a vehicle owned and maybe even operated by another: “Does an employee retain standing to contest a search or seizure in his work vehicle several days after he was arrested and after the vehicle was returned to his employer? Possibly. In this case, however, we hold that Appellant has not met his burden to establish a reasonable expectation of privacy as would confer standing.” Defendant had the burden of establishing standing, but he was in custody, and the employer had the truck back. King v. State, 2023 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 481 (June 28, 2023):

With the proper time frame and burden in mind, we hold that Appellant failed to establish his own privacy interest in the truck at the time of the seizure of the cell phone. Specifically, no questions were asked regarding Applicant’s right to privacy in the tractor trailer at the time of the seizure of the cell phone such as Appellant’s employment status, whether Appellant’s keys or other personal property remained in the trailer, whether he had the right to exclude others from the trailer, or whether the truck was still being put to private use by Appellant. Likewise, no questions were asked of John Feltman, such as the date when the seizure occurred. In fact, John Feltman was not called to testify at all.

Ultimately, Appellant produced insufficient evidence of his reasonable expectation of privacy in the search of the tractor trailer. Nor did the parties’ stipulation establish any reasonable expectation of privacy on Appellant’s behalf. See Moore, 395 S.W.3d at 161; see also Villarreal, 935 S.W.2d at 139. Viewed in the light most favorable to the trial court’s ruling, the record shows Appellant failed to meet his burden of establishing his subjective expectation of privacy that society is prepared to recognize as objectively reasonable under the circumstances. See Granados, 85 S.W.3d at 225-26; Villarreal, 935 S.W.2d at 138-39.

This entry was posted in Standing, Warrant execution. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.