State v. Adams, 905 N.W.2d 758

June 24, 2016: police responded to a report of suspicious activity—people moving backpacks from a Nissan into a Cadillac in a Grand Forks parking lot.
Officers observed behavior consistent with drug use and saw a blue container in plain view inside the Cadillac that one officer believed contained crystal or powdery residue.
Three individuals were in the Cadillac; Adams was in the Nissan. Neither vehicle's occupants consented to a search.
Officers searched the Cadillac based on the blue container in plain view and seized over 80 items related to drug use.
Adams moved to suppress evidence, arguing the warrantless search violated the Fourth Amendment; the district court denied the motion, finding Adams lacked a reasonable expectation of privacy in the Cadillac/backpacks.
A jury later acquitted Adams of heroin possession and convicted him of possession of drug paraphernalia; Adams appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Adams can, on appeal, challenge the district court’s probable-cause finding at the preliminary hearing	State: preliminary hearing finding was proper and need not be revisited after trial	Adams: district court erred in finding probable cause to bind him over	Moot — following trial and conviction, preliminary-hearing probable-cause challenge is not reviewable (affirmed)
Whether Adams had a reasonable expectation of privacy (standing) in backpacks inside the Cadillac, so as to challenge the search	State: Adams lacked standing because he denied ownership, was not in the Cadillac, did not own the car, produced no evidence of possessory interest or identifying marks on the bags	Adams: he had a privacy interest in the backpacks seized from the Cadillac and the search violated his Fourth Amendment rights	Adams lacked a reasonable expectation of privacy in the backpacks; motion to suppress properly denied

State v. Montplaisir, 869 N.W.2d 435 (N.D. 2015) (preliminary-hearing probable-cause rulings become moot after trial)
State v. Gatlin, 851 N.W.2d 178 (N.D. 2014) (standard of review and factors for suppression motions)
State v. Williams, 862 N.W.2d 831 (N.D. 2015) (reasonable-expectation-of-privacy reviewed de novo)
State v. Stockert, 245 N.W.2d 266 (N.D. 1976) (lesser expectation of privacy in automobiles; ambulatory nature of vehicles)
Cady v. Dombrowski, 413 U.S. 433 (U.S. 1973) (searches of automobiles may be treated differently than buildings)
U.S. v. Smith, 621 F.2d 483 (2d Cir. 1980) (factors showing lack of standing where defendant denied ownership and was not present)
U.S. v. Parada, 577 F.3d 1275 (10th Cir. 2009) (defendant failed to establish standing without ownership claim or evidence of possessory interest)
U.S. v. Zabalaga, 834 F.2d 1062 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (no legitimate expectation of privacy where defendant made no claim and container lacked identifying marks)