Opinion ID: 2632441
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Did Evans have an expectation of privacy in the briefcase prior to its seizure?

Text: ¶ 14 To establish that he had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the contents of the briefcase, Evans must satisfy a two fold test: (1) Did he exhibit an actual (subjective) expectation of privacy by seeking to preserve something as private? and (2) [d]oes society recognize that expectation as reasonable? State v. Kealey, 80 Wash.App. 162, 168, 907 P.2d 319 (1995). Evans satisfies both parts of this test. Although the burden is on the defendant to establish a subjective expectation of privacy, he easily meets that burden. He kept the briefcase in his truck, it was closed and locked, and he objected to its seizure. Compare State v. Hepton, 113 Wash.App. 673, 680, 54 P.3d 233 (2002) (leaving garbage at an abandoned house did not show a subjective expectation of privacy). Evans satisfies the second part of the test because society recognizes a general expectation of privacy in briefcases. See Kealey, 80 Wash.App. at 170, 907 P.2d 319 (Purses, briefcases, and luggage constitute traditional repositories of personal belongings protected under the Fourth Amendment.) (citing Arkansas v. Sanders, 442 U.S. 753, 762, 99 S.Ct. 2586, 61 L.Ed.2d 235 (1979)).