§ 3.1.15 Abandonment
1. General Rule. A defendant has no standing to challenge the search of an item that he has abandoned. Abel v. United States, 362 U.S. 217 (1960). Thus, even if a person possessed an expectation of privacy at one time, that privacy interest can be abandoned through words or conduct. “The issue is not abandonment in the strict property-right sense, but whether the person prejudiced by the search had voluntarily discarded, left behind, or otherwise relinquished his interest in the property in question so that he could no longer retain a reasonable expectation of privacy with regard to it at the time of the search.” State v. Walker, 119 Ariz. 121, 126, 579 P.2d 1091, 1096 (1978) (citations omitted) (defendant abandoned interest in suitcases); State v. Peoples, 240 Ariz. 245, 378 P.3d 421 (2016) (overnight guest defendant did not abandon expectation of privacy in cell phone found next to dead victim’s body in bathroom, after he ran from the apartment to direct paramedics); United States v. Fisher, 56 F.4th 673 (9th Cir. 2022) (district court did not clearly err by finding that defendants had abandoned electronic devices in walls of their former residence’s attic); United States v. Tate, 821 F.2d 1328, 1330 (8th Cir. 1987) (defendant abandoned unlocked van on a public highway when he fled). The Ninth Circuit has found that “the government ha[s] the burden of demonstrating abandonment.” United States v. Fernandez, 772 F.2d 495, 499 (9th Cir. 1985) (concluding government failed to meet its burden where it failed to call officer to whom the defendant allegedly denied ownership in suitcase, under facts of that case).
2. Denial of Ownership. A denial of ownership, when questioned, can constitute abandonment. State v. Huffman, 169 Ariz. 465, 820 P.2d 329, 331 (App. 1991) (Div. 2) (by denying any interest in motel room key, defendant relinquished any expectation of privacy he may have had in either the key or the room); State v. Walker, 119 Ariz. 121, 126-27, 579 P.2d 1091 (1978) (defendant refused to identify luggage at airport); United States v. Veatch, 647 F.2d 995, modified, 674 F.2d 1217 (9th Cir. 1981) (defendant denied ownership of wallet); United States v. Washington, 677 F.2d 394 (4th Cir. 1992) (defendant abandoned luggage by stating “It’s not my bag” and “I don’t care what you do”). See also State v. Daniel, 169 Ariz. 73, 75, 817 P.2d 18, 20 (App. 1991) (Div. 2) (defendant intentionally abandoned his cousin’s automobile when he asked...
