Motion to suppress; Standing; People v Mahdi

The court concluded that considering “the factors relevant to standing in the Fourth Amendment context, [defendant-]Mack did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the home.” Thus, the trial court properly found that he did not have standing to challenge the search. Mack argued the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress. The court held that as found by the trial court, the record did “not establish that Mack intended to stay at the home that evening, only that he had spent the previous night there and had returned after work.” Because it was not clear that he “was an overnight guest, the trial court properly looked to several factors to determine whether Mack had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the home, and in particular [homeowner-F’s] bedroom and the attached bathroom or storage room.’” The court found that F’s “description of her relationship with Mack was ambiguous, describing him as a friend, sometimes lover, but not a boyfriend. She also testified that [he] worked on her home as a contractor.” The court held that the “ambiguous personal and professional relationship, as well as the fact that Mack did not own the home or claim it as his residence, suggest that he did not have standing.” Although he “exercised some control by closing the door on the officers when they first arrived, he ultimately deferred to [F] about allowing [them] inside and said nothing when she consented to searches of certain areas. Accordingly, [he] was not exercising control over the home.” The court noted that as “the trial court found, Mack repeatedly denied any possessory interest in the home or any particular area by stating that it was [F’s] house, ‘her’ bedroom, and ‘her stuff.’ [He] never objected to the search on his own behalf but argued only that the officers could not search ‘her stuff’ and gave his opinion on the scope of the parole search. Mack’s actions suggested that he did not have a subjective expectation of privacy or the ability to object to the search. Particularly with regard to the storage room, [he] failed to establish that he had any expectation of privacy in, or even used, that area.” Affirmed.