United States v. Victor Manuel Gomez

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 did not have a sufficient expectation of privacy in the automobile he was driving
• holding that defendant did not have a sufficient expectation of privacy in an automobile he was driving
• suggesting that lack of evidence of “direct” authority to use the vehicle is crucial to the issue of standing
• noting that “[f]ae-tors relevant to the determination of standing include: ownership, possession and/or control of the area searched or item seized; historical use of the property or item; [and] ability to regulate access”
• finding the defendant lacked a-reasonable expectation of privacy in a vehicle, even where a “third party told [the defendant] the owner had given permission for its use”
• “If a defendant fails to prove a sufficiently close connection to the relevant places or objects searched he has no standing to claim that they were searched or seized illegally.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).