California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Bryant, S049596 (Cal. 2014):
In order to challenge a search or seizure, a defendant must allege not only that the police action was unreasonable, but also that the defendant's personal interests were violated. "The 'capacity to claim the protection of the Fourth Amendment depends . . . upon whether the person . . . has a legitimate expectation of privacy in the invaded place.' (Rakas v. Illinois (1978) 439 U.S. 128, 143.) A defendant has the burden to establish a legitimate expectation of privacy in the place searched. [Citations.]" (People v. Rivera (2007) 41 Cal.4th 304, 308, fn. 1.)
In considering this question, courts look to the totality of the circumstances. Appropriate factors include " ' " 'whether the defendant has a [property or] possessory interest in the thing seized or the place searched; whether he has the right to exclude others from that place; whether he has exhibited a subjective expectation that it would remain free from governmental invasion, whether he took normal precautions to maintain his privacy and whether he was legitimately on the premises.' " ' [Citation.]" (People v. Roybal (1998) 19 Cal.4th 481, 507.) Essentially, a legitimate expectation of privacy is one "society is prepared to recognize as reasonable." (Minnesota v. Olson (1990) 495 U.S. 91, 97.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.