Court Opinion

ID: 9748251
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-27 15:57:52.949831+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:25:33.376599
License: Public Domain

*1347NEWMAN, Chief Judge,
concurring:
Where the government’s contention is that as a result of a warrantless search of the person of the defendant certain evidence was seized, the defendant has standing to move for suppression. Nothing in United States v. Salvucci, 448 U.S. 83, 100 S.Ct. 2547, 65 L.Ed.2d 619 (1980), or Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128, 99 S.Ct. 421, 58 L.Ed.2d 387 (1978), is to the contrary. The fact that defendant contends the evidence was not seized from his person does not deprive him of standing.