D.N.H.: Affidavit for SW showed def’s standing

“Examining the totality of the circumstances, the evidence shows that the officers reasonably believed that Guerrero-Nuñez lived in Apartment 204 and would be present when they entered the apartment. As such, their entry into the apartment did not violate Guerrero-Nuñez’s Fourth Amendment rights.” It was also by consent. United States v. Nuñez, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25003 (D.N.H. Feb. 12, 2025). As to standing, the affidavit showed it:

In addition, the government offered this evidence to support its contention that the agents had probable cause to connect the phones to Guerrero-Nuñez and to seize them on the day of his arrest. It cannot offer that evidence to support the seizure of the phones and prevent Guerrero-Nuñez from using these facts to support his standing. See United States v. Cardona, 411 F. Supp. 3d 113, 115 n.1 (D. Mass. 2019). The record evidence is sufficient to establish his standing to challenge the seizure of the phones.

This entry was posted in Burden of pleading, Burden of proof, Standing. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.