Opinion ID: 172352
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Standing to Contest Search

Text: Cardenas and Eckhart contend the district court erred in holding they lack standing to contest the search. We review a court's determination of standing de novo. United States v. Allen, 235 F.3d 482, 489 (10th Cir.2000). Fourth Amendment rights are personal and cannot be claimed vicariously. United States v. Valdez Hocker, 333 F.3d 1206, 1208 (10th Cir.2003). The proponent of a motion to suppress has the burden of adducing facts at the suppression hearing indicating that his own rights were violated by the challenged search. Allen, 235 F.3d at 489 (quotations omitted). Whether a defendant's own Fourth Amendment rights were violated by a challenged search turns on the classic Fourth Amendment test: whether the defendant manifested a subjective expectation of privacy in the area searched and whether society is prepared to recognize that expectation as objectively reasonable. This court has held that, in order for a defendant to show such an expectation of privacy in an automobile, the defendant bears the burden at the suppression hearing to show a legitimate interest in or [a] lawful control over the car. Id. (quotations and citations omitted). [A] defendant need not submit legal documentation showing a chain of lawful custody from the registered owner to himself. Hocker, 333 F.3d at 1209. Where, as here, the proponent of a motion to suppress is ... not the registered owner ... the proponent bears the burden of establishing `that he gained possession from the owner or someone with authority to grant possession.' Id. ( quoting United States v. Arango, 912 F.2d 441, 445 (10th Cir.1990)). We consider: (1) whether the defendant asserted ownership over the items seized from the vehicle; (2) whether the defendant testified to his expectation of privacy at the suppression hearing; and (3) whether the defendant presented any testimony at the suppression hearing that he had a legitimate possessory interest in the vehicle. Allen, 235 F.3d at 489. While Cardenas and Eckhart did assert ownership over the items seized from the vehicle, they did not meet their burden of establishing a legitimate possessory interest in the vehicle. They did not testify to their expectation of privacy; nor did they present testimony or evidence establishing they gained possession of the truck from someone with authority to grant it. They both claimed the truck had recently been purchased by Cardenas' Fresno uncle, who had given them permission to drive it to Pennsylvania, but they produced no evidence to support this claim and never explained their relationship to the registered owner of the vehicle, Gustavo Martinez (neither Jose nor Pedro). Our cases are clear. A defendant does not have standing to contest a search where he does not establish a link between himself and the registered owner. See United States v. Betancur, 24 F.3d 73, 77 (10th Cir.1994) (holding the borrower of a car lacks standing where the car registration indicates it is owned by someone other than the alleged lender and the borrower fails to present any evidence of a linkage between the lender and registered owner); United States v. Martinez, 983 F.2d 968, 973 (10th Cir.1992) (holding the driver of a car lacks standing where she claims she borrowed the car from a friend, who in turn borrowed it from a third person, who was not shown to be connected in any way with the registered owner); Arango, 912 F.2d at 445-46 (denying standing to defendant who borrowed the vehicle from a person whom he knew was not the registered owner and who provided no evidence suggesting the lender was in lawful possession of the vehicle); United States v. Erwin, 875 F.2d 268 (10th Cir.1989) (denying standing to defendant who did not introduce any evidence at his suppression hearing to establish his legitimate possession of the vehicle). The district court correctly concluded Cardenas and Eckhart lack standing to challenge the search. Thus, we need not examine the constitutionality of that search. See Allen, 235 F.3d at 490.