United States v. Russell B. Allen

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a defendant who failed to remain current on his rental payments lacked a legitimate expectation of privacy in his hotel room
• finding that, while the third-party intervention doctrine did not apply, termination of Allen's guest status eliminated any expectation of privacy he had in his motel room
• holding that district court did not plainly err when it admitted guns that had been given to a private citizen in between their seizure from the defendant and the trial, and noting that “there was no reasonable probability of misidentification”
• concluding 22 defendant can no longer assert a legitimate privacy interest in the motel room after the manager effectively took possession by locking him out
• refusing to apply Jacobsen in part because the police crossed the threshold of the motel room to conduct the search
• noting as an additional independent ground for decision the fact that the room rental period had expired because the defendant had made telephone calls the cost of which exceeded his account balance

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).