38 F.4th 1364
11th Cir.2022Background:
- Officers stopped Devon Cohen after he ran a stop sign; he repeatedly refused to return to his car and was arrested for resisting without violence.
- Officers discovered Cohen’s driver’s license was suspended; the vehicle was a rental registered to Enterprise and rented to Sheila Brewer, who had given Cohen permission to drive it.
- Officers arranged for the vehicle to be towed to Enterprise and conducted an inventory search before releasing the car to the towing company; they found a loaded firearm in the center console and Cohen admitted knowing it was there.
- State charges (resisting, driving with suspended license) were dismissed after a federal indictment charged Cohen under 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2) for being a felon in possession of a firearm.
- Cohen moved to suppress the firearm, arguing the impound and inventory were unlawful and did not follow Tampa Police Department procedures; the district court denied suppression (finding lack of standing and alternatively that the inventory was lawful) and convicted Cohen after a bench trial.
- On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit held Cohen had Fourth Amendment standing but affirmed the denial of the suppression motion because the impound and inventory were lawful under the totality of the circumstances and department policy.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fourth Amendment standing to challenge vehicle search | Cohen: driving with a suspended license does not defeat his expectation of privacy; he had renter's permission | Government: combination of being unlicensed and unauthorized to drive the rental car eliminates standing | Court: Cohen has standing; unauthorized status on rental agreement alone does not defeat expectation of privacy (Byrd applies); unlicensed status alone does not automatically strip standing |
| Validity of impound/inventory search | Cohen: tow to Enterprise was not a department "police" or "rotation" impound and did not comply with procedures; thus inventory exception inapplicable | Government: officers maintained custody and acted in good faith under department policy; inventory search justified to protect vehicle and contents | Court: inventory search lawful; impound/inventory was reasonable and consistent with Tampa PD policy, so suppression properly denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Byrd v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 1518 (2018) (driver not listed on rental agreement may still have reasonable expectation of privacy)
- Minnesota v. Carter, 525 U.S. 83 (1998) (reasonable-expectation-of-privacy framework)
- Rakas v. Illinois, 439 U.S. 128 (1978) (expectation of privacy must be one society recognizes as reasonable)
- United States v. Lyle, 919 F.3d 716 (2d Cir. 2019) (held unauthorized and unlicensed rental driver lacked standing)
- United States v. Bettis, 946 F.3d 1024 (8th Cir. 2020) (rejected Lyle’s broad rule; unauthorized driver may have standing with renter’s consent)
- United States v. Wilson, 979 F.3d 889 (11th Cir. 2020) (inventory-search exception to warrant requirement)
- United States v. Isaac, 987 F.3d 980 (11th Cir. 2021) (officer may impound vehicle if decision is in good faith and based on standard criteria)
- Sammons v. Taylor, 967 F.2d 1533 (11th Cir. 1992) (government bears burden to show inventory-search exception requirements were satisfied)