Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Fifth Circuit· 8/19/2014

United States v. William Iraheta

Citations

  • 764 F.3d 455
  • 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 15960
  • 2014 WL 4086372

How courts have described this case

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

  • explaining that passengers of a vehicle have standing to challenge seizure of their luggage
  • officers acted unreasonably in searching luggage in a trunk based on a driver's consent when there were two passengers and three suitcases-one per car occupant
  • officers acted unreasonably in searching luggage in a trunk based on a driver's consent when there were two passengers and three suitcases—one per car occupant
  • “The proponent of a motion to suppress has the burden of establishing that his own Fourth Amendment rights were violated” (citation omitted)
  • “A defendant who abandons . . . property prior to the search does not have standing to challenge a search subsequent to his abandonment . . . .” (emphasis is original)
  • where neither passenger denied ownership of a duffle bag in the vehicle in which they were riding, they had not abandoned the bag, and had standing to challenge the search of the bag

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Stewart, Dennis, Gilstrap

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

16 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

28 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named United States v. William Iraheta

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.