Welcome to The Briefcase

Commentary and analysis of Ohio criminal law and whatever else comes to mind, served with a dash of snark.  Continue Reading »

×

Standing in search & seizure

The police see a bunch of guys engaged in activities consistent with selling drugs, round them up, and find a set of car keys on the ground.  They ask who the keys belong to; nobody fesses up.  They use them to open a nearby car, and find drugs and a number of personal items belonging to one of the suspects.  Can the suspect argue that the search was illegal?

Nope, says the 8th District last week in State v. Middleton.  Whether the search was proper under the 4th Amendment is actually immaterial, because the defendant, by denying that the property was his, lacked standing to assert the search's illegality.  Actually, there's a long line of decisions which support that result, and there's a good review of them in this 2004 11th District decision.  The general rule is that one who denies possession of property has, in essence, abandoned it, and lacks the possessory interest sufficient to invoke 4th Amendment protection.

There's one notable exception to that:  where the denial is basically compelled by the officer's prior search of the item.  It's difficult to expect a person to admit to ownership of property that's going to wind up getting him arrested.  This US 10th Circuit decision is a good one to have on that score. 

By the way, in light of my comment on Monday on your suggestions about this site, if one of them was "have shorter posts," you'll get your wish this week.  I've got a lot of stuff going on, and so it'll be short and sweet.  Well, sweet we're not sure, but short, definitely.

Search

Recent Entries

  • November 15, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    Plea withdrawals (again), sexual predator hearings, and an appellate law question
  • November 7, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    Don't listen to prosecutors about the law, good new/bad news jokes on appeal, and the Byzantine course of a death penalty case
  • October 24, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    Trying to change the past
  • October 16, 2017
    En banc on sentencing
    The 8th District takes a look at what State v. Marcum means
  • October 13, 2017
    Friday Roundup
    Musings about the death penalty and indigent defense
  • October 11, 2017
    Case Update
    SCOTUS starts its new term, and the Ohio Supreme Court hands down two decisions
  • October 10, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    Collaboration by inmates, fun in Juvenile Court, the limits of Creech, and more
  • October 5, 2017
    State v. Thomas
    The Ohio Supreme Court reverses a death penalty conviction
  • October 4, 2017
    Russ' Excellent Adventure
    A juror doesn't like me. Boo-hoo.
  • October 3, 2017
    What's Up in the 8th
    What not to argue on appeal, waiving counsel, the perils of being a juvenile, and expert witnesses