Court Opinion

ID: 9495327
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 15:59:39.307293+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:56:56.661245
License: Public Domain

THOMAS, Circuit Judge,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent from the holding that Long lacked standing to challenge the search at the East Clay property. The dispositive question is whether Long is entitled to rely upon evidence presented by the government to establish standing.
Prosecutors do not have unbounded authority to “charge possession but dispute expectation of privacy regardless of the underlying facts.” United States v. Issacs, 708 F.2d 1365, 1367 (9th Cir.1983). Here, the government presented contradictory theories as to whether Long resided at the East Clay property — arguing at the bail hearing that he did, but contending at the suppression hearing that he did not.
Of course, Long cannot rely solely upon the arguments or theories advanced by the government to support an expectation of privacy. See United States v. Singleton, 987 F.2d 1444, 1449 (9th Cir.1993). Nor can he rely upon “the government’s allegations in the pleadings, or positions the government has taken in the case, to establish standing.” United States v. Zermeno, 66 F.3d 1058, 1062 (9th Cir.1995). Instead, it is Long’s obligation to “present evidence of his standing, or at least to point to specific evidence in the record which the government presented and which established his standing.” Id.
Zermeno supports the position that Long, although constrained from relying on the government’s argument, is entitled to “point to specific evidence in the record which the government presented.” Here, the government presented evidence that Long and his girlfriend, Khong Donang-boupha, were cultivating, manufacturing and distributing marijuana at the Clay Street property at the time the Clay Street warrant was executed. An affidavit presented by the government indicated that officers had spoken with the family of Long’s girlfriend and had been told that she was living at the Clay Street residence with her boyfriend and two children in May 1994, when the property was searched. Items seized during the Clay Street search included a picture I.D. for the girlfriend; receipts in the name of Sean Vong (an alias for Long); some of Long’s clothing; and photos of Long with his girlfriend and two children. Long is entitled to rely upon this evidence in support of his claim of standing. If this evidence were considered, it would be sufficient to establish his standing to contest the search.
The government investigated, charged, tried, convicted, and sentenced Long on the theory that he resided at the East Clay property, cultivated marijuana at that *1109address, and possessed illegal weapons at that address. Based on the evidence that the government tendered in support of its theory, I would hold that Long has standing to challenge the search at the East Clay property.