United States v. Brandon Kennedy, 15-4009

On Nov. 26, 2012 an AT&T store in Green Tree, PA was robbed; the robber wore a gray sweatsuit and took cash and electronic devices; surveillance video captured the robbery.
Brandon Kennedy traveled from Michigan in a rental car (driven by Ms. Lang), returned wearing a gray sweatsuit, and later was stopped in Michigan for speeding; Lang was arrested for DUI and Kennedy was arrested on warrants.
An inventory search of the impounded rental car by police uncovered blue nylon bags containing numerous Apple devices; two days later a firearm was found in the car at the rental office.
Items from the car were later matched to the AT&T robbery; Kennedy was indicted for Hobbs Act robbery (18 U.S.C. § 1951), being a felon in possession (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)), and brandishing a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence (18 U.S.C. § 924(c)).
Before trial Kennedy sought suppression of the car evidence (arguing a privacy interest as a passenger) and sought dashcam footage of the traffic stop; dashcam footage was lost and not produced. The district court denied suppression and the case proceeded to trial.
A jury convicted Kennedy on all counts; he received 155 months’ imprisonment, including an 84-month mandatory term under § 924(c). He appealed on four grounds: lost dashcam (due process), prosecutorial burden-shifting, § 924(c) validity post-Johnson, and Fourth Amendment standing.

Issue	Kennedy's Argument	Government's Argument	Held
Lost dashcam video & due process	Loss deprived him of potentially exculpatory evidence and violated due process	Video was lost through non‑bad‑faith errors; other evidence available	No due process violation; defendant failed to show bad faith in loss of evidence
Prosecutorial burden‑shifting	Prosecution implied defense had duty to obtain DNA/fingerprint testing on the gun	Prosecutor was responding to defense focus on absence of forensic tests; burden remained on government	No plain error; remarks not egregious and prosecutor clarified burden; evidence against defendant strong
Validity of § 924(c) conviction after Johnson	Hobbs Act robbery does not qualify as a "crime of violence" under the elements clause; residual clause void under Johnson	Where robbery and § 924(c) brandishing are tried and convicted together, the elements‑clause applies to robbery committed while brandishing	Affirmed: Hobbs Act robbery committed while brandishing a firearm is a crime of violence under § 924(c)(3)(A); no need to reach residual clause challenge
Fourth Amendment suppression (standing)	As an authorized user of the rental car, he had a reasonable expectation of privacy as a passenger	Passengers generally lack a reasonable expectation of privacy in rental cars; no binding precedent recognizing passenger standing	Denial of suppression affirmed; court declines to extend Fourth Amendment standing to rental‑car passengers

California v. Trombetta, 467 U.S. 479 (establishes requirements to show due process violation from lost evidence)
Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 U.S. 51 (requires bad faith by police for due process violation when evidence is lost)
United States v. Deaner, 1 F.3d 192 (3d Cir.) (failure to follow procedure does not alone prove bad faith)
United States v. Robinson, 844 F.3d 137 (3d Cir.) (when robbery and § 924(c) brandishing are tried together, court may consider contemporaneous conviction to show elements‑clause crime of violence)
United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 (plain‑error review standards)
United States v. Brown, 254 F.3d 454 (3d Cir.) (prosecutorial misconduct/plain error context)
United States v. Kennedy, 638 F.3d 159 (3d Cir.) (rental‑car driver privacy rule and possibility of extraordinary exceptions)
Johnson v. United States, 576 U.S. 591 (Supreme Court) (invalidated ACCA residual clause for vagueness)