FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT M ay 8, 2008 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK C O R R EC TED [ P UB L I S H]

I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 07- 13473 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C . D ocketN o. 06 -001 00 -C R -01-B B M -1 U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s U L Y S S E S A N T W A N H A R R I S , a .k .a . A n to in e H a rr is , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e N o rth e rn D is tr ic t o f G e o r g ia

_________________________ ( M ay 8, 2008) B efo re T JO F L A T , A N D E R S O N an d H U L L , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: U l y s s e s A ntw a n H a rr i s appe a l s hi s c onvi c t i on f orpos s e s s i on of

af i r e a rm by2

a c on vi ct ed fe l on , i n v i ol at i on of 18 U . S . C . §§ 92 2(g) and 9 24 (e ), and see ks a new tri al o n tw o g ro u n d s: (1 ) th e d i stri ctco u rterred b y d en yi n g h i s m o t i o n t o su p p ress a. 357 c a l i be rM a gnum pi s t ol f ound by a n A t l a nt a , G e or gi apol i c e of f i c e runde rthe fl oo r m ati n the pass enger’ s c om partm entof a Y el l ow t axi cab i n w hi ch he w as r id in g ; ( 2 ) s ta te m e n ts h e m a d e to f e d e r a l A T F a g e n ts w h ile h e w a s b e in g h e ld in s t a t e c us t ody on s t a t e c r i m i na l c ha r ge s ( butbe f or e he w a s c ha r ge d i n the i ns t a nt c a s e ) , w h ic h th e c o u rt a d m itte d in to e v id e n c e , w e r e ta k e n in v io la tio n o f h is S ix th A m e ndm e ntr i ghtt o c ouns e l . W e a ddr e s s the s e gr ounds i n turn. I. T h e f a c ts g iv in g r is e to th e p o lic e o f f ic e r ’s s e iz u r e o f

th e p is to l w e r e th e s e . A t1: 00 a . m . on M a y 16, 2005, O f f i c e rM i n W oo C haw a s on r out i ne pa tr ol i n a h ig h c r im e a r e aw h e r e c r a c kc o c a in e tr a f f ic k in g w a s r o u tin e . H e o b s e rv e d H a rr is w a l k i nt o apa rki ng l ot , r e a c h be hi nd s om e bus he s a l ong the f e nc e l i ne , r e m ove w h a t ap p e a r e d to b e ad a rk - c o lo r e d h a n d g u n , a n d p la c e it in h is p o c k e t. T h is c aughtC ha ’ s a tt e nt i on be c aus e drug tr a f f i c ke r s f r e que nt l yhi de drugs a nd ha ndguns be hi nd bus he s . S hort l ythe r e a f t e r , aY e l l ow t a xi c ab va n a rr i ve d a nd pi cked up H arri s. C ha fol l ow ed the cab d ow n a four-l ane s tre et(tw o l anes i n eac h di r e c t i on) , a nd obs e rve d i tc ha nge l a ne s w i thoutus i ng i t s turn s i gna l , i n vi ol a t i on of G e or gi al a w . C hapr om pt l y pul l e d the c ab ove r , e xpl a i ne d the vi ol a t i on t o theHar ris contends that Of

ficer Cha also lacked proba ble ca use to search the c ab. The 1 district court madeno findingon that issue, and the Government does not contend that Cha had prob a blec a us eto s e arch. We t

here foredono t add

re ss t heque sti on

of wh e ther C ha

had p roba

ble causeto effe ct the sea

rch of the ca b’s passeng er c ompartment.

3 dr i ve r , a s ke d H a rr i s t o e xi tthe c ab, a nd i nqui r e d a s t o w he r e he w a s goi ng. C ha al so as ked h i m i f he had any drugs or w eapo ns on hi s per son; H arri s s ai d “ no . ” H arri s then con se nt ed t o a se ar ch of hi s per son, and C ha foun d n o d rugs or w eapo n. C ha then o bt ai ned the cab d ri ver’ s c on se ntt o searc h the pass enger c o m p a rtm e n t o f

th e c ab , w h e r e H a rr is h a d b e e n s ittin g . O n lif tin g th e f lo o rm a t, C h af o u n d th e .3 5 7 M a g n u m a t is s u e . H a rr is a s s e rts th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u rt e rr e d in a d m ittin g th e p is to l in to evi dence because ( 1) O ff i ce r C ha l ac ked p robabl e c ause t o st op the t axi cab ; 1 (2) H arri s had a l egi t i m at e e xp ec t at i on of pri vacyi n the ent i re pass enger co m p artm en to f th e cab ; an d (3 ) th e cab d ri v er’ s co n sen tw as i n effecti v e b ecau se H a rr is h a d as up e r io rp r iv a c y in te r e s t.

“ T he F ourth A m e ndm e ntpr ot e c t s i ndi vi dua l s f r om unr e a s onabl e s e a r c h a nd s e iz u r e .” C h a n th a s o u x a t, 3 4 2 F .3 d a t 1 2 7 5 . A tr a f f ic s to p , h o w e v e r , is c ons t i tut i ona l i f

i ti s e i the rba s e d upon pr obabl e c aus e t o be l i e ve atr a f f i c vi ol a t i on ha s oc c urr e d orj us t i f

i e d by r e a s onabl e s us pi c i on i n a c c or da nc e w i th T e rry , 392 U . S . 1, 88 S . C t . 1868. C ha ntha s ouxa t , 342 F . 3d a t1275. W he n de t e rm i ni ng w he the ra n of

f i c e rha d pr obabl e c aus e t o be l i e ve tha tatr a f f i c vi ol a t i on oc c urr e d,4

th e “o f f ic e r ’s m o tiv e in m a k in g th e tr a f f ic s to p d o e s n o t in v a lid a te w h a t is otherw i se obj ec t i vel y j ust i fi abl e behavi or un der the F ou rth A m endm ent . ” U ni t ed S t a t e s v. S i m m ons , 172 F . 3d 775, 778 ( 11th C i r . 1999) ( quot a t i on om i tt e d) . T he C ons t i tut i on a l s o pe rm i t s pol i c e of f i c e r s t o c onduc tabr i e f

i nve s t i ga t orys t op, T erryv. O hi o, 39 2 U . S . 1, 88 S . C t . 18 68 , 20 L . E d. 2d 88 9 (19 68 ), “ i f they have a r e a s o n ab le , a rtic u lab le s u s p ic io n b a s e d o n o b je c tiv e f a c ts th a t” a n in d iv id u a l is engaged i n cri m i nal ac t i vi ty. U ni t ed S t at es v. P ow el l , 22 2 F . 3d 91 3, 91 7 (11 th C i r. 2000) . A de t e rm i na t i on of r e a s onabl e s us pi c i on i s ba s e d on the t ot a l i tyof the c ir c u m s ta n c e s , a n d “[ i]t d o e s n o t r e q u ir e o f f ic e r s to c a tc h th e s u s p e c t in ac r im e . I ns t e a d, [ a ] r e a s onabl e s us pi c i on of c r i m i na l a c t i vi tym a ybe f orm e d byobs e rvi ng e x c lu s iv e lyle g a l a c tiv ity .” U n ite d S ta te s v . A c o s ta , 3 6 3 F .3 d 1 1 4 1 , 1 1 4 5 ( 1 1 th C i r. 20 04 ) ( ci t at i on s om i tt ed). A dd i t i on al l y, the i ss ue i s notw hether the part i cul ar of f i c e ri nvol ve d “ a c tua l l y a nd s ubj e c t i ve l yha d the pe rt i ne ntr e a s onabl e s us pi c i on, b u t w h e th e r , g iv e n th e c ir c u m s ta n c e s , r e a s o n ab le s u s p ic io n o b je c tiv e lye x is te d to j us t i f y [ the i nve s t i ga t ory s t op] . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. N une z , 455 F . 3d 1223, 1226 (1 1 th C i r. 2 0 0 6 ). W i th th e fo reg o i n g p ri n ci p l es i n h an d , w e assess H arri s’ s fi rst poi nt : O f f i c e rC hal a c ke d pr obabl e c aus e t o s t op the t a xi c ab. O f f i c e rC haha d pr obabl e c aus e t o s t op the t a xi c ab be c aus e he obs e rve d the ta x ic ab c o m m it atr a f

f ic v io la tio n w h e n it f

a ile d to s ig n a l d u r in g ala n e c h a n g e .5

G eorgi a l aw re qu i re s dri vers t o si gn al an i nt ent i on t o chang e l anes w hen n ec es sary t o a l e rtothe rdr i ve r s . O . C . G . A . § 40- 6- 123( b) . C haa l s o ha d r e a s onabl e s us pi c i on t o con du ctan i nv es t i gat ory T erryst op because he w i tness ed H arri s r em ov e adark obj ec tthatl oo ked l i ke a handg un fr om behi nd som e bushes i m m edi at el y bef ore g e ttin g in to th e ta x ic ab . R e ga r di ng H a rr i s ’ s s e c ond poi nt , the pa rt i e s di s put e w he the rH a rr i s ha d a le g itim a te e x p e c ta tio n o f p r iv a c y in th e c ab ’s p a s s e n g e rc o m p a rtm e n t, p a rtic u la r ly th e a r e au n d e rn e a th th e c o m p a rtm e n t’s f lo o rm a t. T he a c c us e d be a r s the bur de n of de m ons tr a t i ng al e gi t i m a t e e xpe c t a t i on of pr i va c y i n the a r e as e a r c he d. S e e U ni t e d S t a t e s v. C oope r , 133 F . 3d 1394, 1398 (11th C i r. 19 98 ) ( ho l di ng thatthe i nd i vi du al chal l engi ng the se ar ch has the bu rden of bo th p roof and p er suas i on ). If the ac cuse d succe ss ful l y e st abl i shes an e xpe c t a t i on of

pr i va c y , the bur de n the n s hi f t s t o the gove rnm e ntt o pr ove tha tthe s e a r c h w a s r e a s onabl e ba s e d upon ar e c ogni z e d e xc e pt i on t o the w a rr a nt r e q u ir e m e n t. U n ite d S ta te s v . B a c h n e r , 7 0 6 F .2 d 1 1 2 1 , 1 1 2 5 - 2 6 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 8 3 ) . A pe r s on ha s al e gi t i m a t e e xpe c t a t i on of pr i va c yi f

( 1) he ha s as ubj e c t i ve expect at i on of pri vacy , and (2) soci ety i s pre pare d t o rec og ni ze thatexpect at i on as obj e c t i ve l y r e a s onabl e . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. S e gur a - B a l t a z a r , 448 F . 3d 1281, 1286 (11th C i r. 20 06 ). “ A l egi t i m at e e xp ec t at i on of pri vacy[m ust ] be prov en by fa ct ors6

beyond m er e posse ss i on , such as a r i gh tt o excl ud e or ari gh tt o p ri vacy . ” U ni t ed S t a t e s v. E s pi nos a - O r l a ndo, 704 F . 2d 507, 512 ( 11 C i r . 1983) ( c i t i ng R a ka s v. th I l l i noi s , 439 U . S . 128, 143- 44 & n. 12, 99 S . C t . 421, 430- 31 & n. 12, 58 L . E d. 2d 3 8 7 ( 1 9 7 8 ) ) . S u p rem e C o u rtcases su g g esti n d i ct a th ata t ax i cab p assen g er m ay en j o y a l e gi t i m a t e e xpe c t a t i on of pr i va c y i n ac ab, a l though the C ourtha s notde f i ne d the e xa c tpa r a m e t e r s of

s uc h e xpe c t a t i on. S e e K a t z v. U ni t e d S t a t e s , 389 U . S . 347, 35 2, 88 S . C t . 50 7, 51 1-12 , 19 L . E d. 2d 57 6 (19 67 ) ( no t i ng that“ [n] o l es s than an in d iv id u a l . . . in ata x ic ab ,” a n in d iv id u a l in ate le p h o n e b o o th “w h o o c c u p ie s it, s hut s the doorbe hi nd hi m , a nd pa y s the t ol l ” i s e nt i t l e d t o the pr ot e c t i on of the F ourth A m e ndm e nt ) ; R i os v. U ni t e d S t a t e s , 364 U . S . 253, 261- 62, 80 S . C t . 1431, 1436- 37, 4 L . E d. 2d 1688 ( 1960) ( appl y i ng F ourth A m e ndm e ntpr i nc i pl e s t o the s e a r c h of the pa s s e nge ra r e aof

a n oc c upi e d t a xi c ab w i thouta ddr e s s i ng the oc c upa nt ’ s e xpe c t a t i on of pr i va c y ) . R e ga r di ng pa s s e nge r s i n apr i va t e c a r , the C ou rthas hel d thata pas se ng er , w ho has no p osse ss ory i nt er es ti n the aut om ob i l e, d o e s n o t h a v e ale g itim a te e x p e c ta tio n o f p r iv a c yin th e in te r io ro f th e au to m o b ile b e c au s e h e d o e s n o th a v e th e r i g h tt o e x c l u d e o th e r s f r o m th e c a r . Ra k a s , 4 3 9 U . S. a t140, 143 n. 12, 148, 99 S . C t . a t429, 430 n. 12. O f c our s e , w e de notknow the effect of R ak as o n K at z an d R i o s.7

W h il e w e h av e e stab li sh ed so m e g en er al b o u n d ar ies r eg ar d in g a p as se n g er ’s le g itim a te e x p e c ta tio n o f p r iv a c y in ap r iv a te v e h ic le , w e h a v e n o t s p e c if ic a lly addres se d a t axi cab p as se ng er ’ s s t andi ng t o chal l enge a s earc h o f the pass enger c o m p a rtm e n t o f

th e c ab . S e e C o o p e r , 1 3 3 F .3 d a t 1 3 9 8 ( “A p a s s e n g e ru s u a lly la c k s ap r iv a c y in te r e s t in av e h ic le th a t th e p a s s e n g e rn e ith e ro w n s n o rr e n ts ” ) . W e have re cogn i ze d a F ou rth A m endm entri gh tt o chal l enge the se ar ch of a hi dd en c om pa rtm e nti n w hi c h the r e w a s no l e gi t i m a t e e xpe c t a t i on of pr i va c y , be c aus e the au th o ri t i es g ai n ed access t o th e co m p artm en tth ro u g h an area i n w h i ch th ere w as a r e a s onabl e e xpe c t a t i on of pr i va c y . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. M or a l e s , 847 F . 2d 671, 672- 73 ( 11th C i r . 1988) ( hol di ng tha tbe c aus e di s c ove ryof ahi dde n c om pa rtm e nti n the f l oorof the c r e w m e m be r s ’ s l e e pi ng qua rt e r s i nvol ve d as e a r c h of the s l e e pi ng q u a rte r s its e lf

, th e c r e w m e m b e r s h a d “ar e a s o n ab le e x p e c ta tio n o f p r iv a c yto pr e ve ntthe unw a rr a nt e d pr oc e s s of the s e a r c h” ) . I d. a t672- 73. H ow ever , w e nee d n otre sol ve w hether and t o w hatext enta t axi cab p assen g er en

j o ys a l eg i t i m at e ex p ect at i o n o f p ri v acy i n a cab b ecau se i n th i s case the c ab dr i ve rga ve the of f i c e r s c ons e ntt o s e a r c h the c ab.

“ A se ar ch of prop erty, w i tho utw arrantor prob abl e c ause , i s proper und er the F ourth A m e ndm e ntw he n pr e c e de d byva l i d c ons e nt . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. D unkl e y , 911 F . 2d 522, 525 ( 11th C i r . 1990) . “ A n of f i c e rc onduc t i ng ar out i ne8

tr a f f ic s to p m a y r e q u e s t c o n s e n t to s e a r c h th e v e h ic le .” U n ite d S ta te s v . P u r c e ll, 2 3 6 F .3 d 1 2 7 4 , 1 2 8 1 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 1 ) . A th ir dp a rtyw h o h a s “c o m m o n au th o r ity ove rorothe rs uf

f i c i e ntr e l a t i ons hi p t o the pr e m i s e s ore f f e c t s s oughtt o be i ns pe c t e d” m a y gi ve va l i d c ons e ntt o s e a r c h a n a r e a . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. M a t l oc k, 415 U . S . 16 4, 17 1, 94 S . C t . 98 8, 99 3, 39 L . E d. 2d 24 2 (19 74 ). S peci fi ca l l y, a thi rd pa rty ’ s c ons e nti s va l i d i f he ha s m utua l us e of

the pr ope rty , w i th j oi nta c c e s s t o or control of the ar eafor m ostpu rposes . Id. at17 1 n . 7, 94 S . C t . at99 3 n . 7. H ow ever , “ap h y s ic a llyp r e s e n t in h ab ita n t’s e x p r e s s r e f u s a l o f c o n s e n t to ap o lic e s e a r c h is di s pos i t i ve a s t o hi m , r e ga r dl e s s of the c ons e ntof

af e l l ow oc c upa nt . ” G e or gi av. R a n d o lp h , 5 4 7 U .S . 1 0 3 , 1 2 2 - 2 3 , 1 2 6 S .C t. 1 5 1 5 , 1 5 2 8 , 1 6 4 L .E d .2 d 2 0 8 ( 2 0 0 6 ) . T h u s , th e e x te n s io n o f

th e p r o h ib itio n o n w a rr a n tle s s s e a r c h e s ap p lie s o n lyto de f e nda nt s w ho a r e pr e s e nta nd a c tua l l ye xpr e s s ar e f us a l t o c ons e nt . I d. a t121- 2 3 , 1 2 6 S .C t. a t 1 5 2 7 - 2 8 ; s e e U n ite d S ta te s v . D e la n c y , 5 0 2 F .3 d 1 2 9 7 , 1 3 0 8 n .7 (1 1 th C ir. 2 0 0 7 ) ( h o ld in g th at R an d o lp h w as in ap p li cab le w h en itw as n o t “ a s itu a tio n w h e r e o n e r e s id e n t c o n s e n te d a n d th e o th e rr e f u s e d ” ) . W e h a v e e x te n d e d th e S u p r e m e C o u rt’s r e a s o n in g in M a tlo c kto ap p lyto c o n s e n s u a l v e h ic le s e a r c h e s . D u n k le y , 9 1 1 F .2 d a t 5 2 5 - 2 6 . I n D u n k le y , w e h e ld thatthe dri ver posse ss ed j oi ntac ce ss and i m m edi at e c on trol ov erthe vehi cl e e ven though the l e s s e e of

the ve hi c l e w a s apa s s e nge r . I d. a t526. B a s e d on thi s j oi nt9

a c c e s s , the dr i ve r ’ s c ons e ntt o s e a r c h w a s va l i d a tl e a s ti n r e ga r ds t o the f r onta nd ba c k s e a t s . I d. A ss um i ng H arri s had a l egi t i m at e e xp ec t at i on of pri vacyi n the ent i re pa s s e nge rc om pa rtm e nt , the di s tr i c tc ourtdi d note rrbyf a i l i ng t o s uppr e s s the pi st ol because O ff

i ce r C ha j ust i fi abl y r el i ed on the cab d ri ver’ s c on se ntt o searc h th e a r e a . A ls o , a lth o u g h p r e s e n t w h e n th e d r iv e rc o n s e n te d to th e s e a r c h , H a rr is never expres se d any di sa gree m entw i th the dri ver’ s c on se nt ; ra ther, he re m ai ned s ile n t. I n s u m , w e f

in d n o e rr o rin th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s a d m is s io n o f th e p is to l in to evi dence. II . H a rr i s ’ s s e c ond gr ound f orr e ve r s a l a nd ane w tr i a l i s tha tthe s t a t e m e nt s he m a de t o the A T F a ge nt s w hi l e he w a s be i ng he l d i n the F ul t on C ountyJ a i l on c r i m i na l c ha r ge s br oughtby the S t a t e w e r e i na dm i s s i bl e . H a rr i s m a de the st at em ent s a ft erw ai vi ng hi s M i rand a r i gh t s; he ar gu es , ho w ever , thatthey w er e i na dm i s s i bl e be c aus e ha vi ng be e n pr ovi de d a n a tt orne yt o r e pr e s e nthi m on the s t a t e c ha r ge s , hi s r i ghtt o c ouns e l f orpurpos e s of

the a ge nt s ’ que s t i oni ng hi m about h is p o te n tia l v io la tio n o f 1 8 U .S .C . § § 9 2 2 ( g ) a n d 9 2 4 ( e ) h a d a tta c h e d . H a rr is ’s a r g u m e n t tu rn s o n w h e th e rth e d u a l s o v e r e ig n tyd o c tr in e ap p lie s .10

W e answ er ed thi s quest i on i n the af fi rm at i ve on M ar ch 13 , 20 08 , i n U ni t ed S t at es v . B u rg es t, 2 0 0 8 W L 6 5 9 5 5 0 (C .A . 1 1 (F la.). In th at ca se , w e h eld th at “B u rg es t’ s p r io rin v o c a tio n o f

h is r ig h t to c o u n s e l f

o rh is s ta te d ru g c h a r g e d id n o t a tta c h to the unc ha r ge d f

e de r a l drug of

f e ns e s w he n the f

e de r a l a ge nt s i nt e rvi e w e d hi m . ” I d. a t9. F o rth e f

o r e g o in g r e a s o n s , H a rr is ’s c o n v ic tio n is AF F I R ME D.