United States v. Maestas
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 8446
| 10th Cir. | 2011Background
- Maestas participated in a controlled meth purchase arranged by FBI and APD on June 29, 2009 at a Mountain Road triplex; he had spent substantial time there recently and carried a firearm during the transaction.
- After the arrest, officers recovered 42 grams of methamphetamine and a handgun from an enclosed garbage storage area adjacent to the residence.
- Maestas moved to suppress the meth and firearm as evidence; he claimed a reasonable Fourth Amendment privacy interest in the garbage area.
- The district court denied the suppression motion, ruling Maestas lacked a privacy interest in the area because it was a common, shared space.
- Maestas pleaded guilty to all counts while preserving the right to appeal the suppression ruling, which the Tenth Circuit reviews de novo.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did Maestas have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the garbage storage area? | Maestas had ongoing ties to the home and stayed there, creating a privacy interest. | Area is shared/common; no meaningful privacy expectation. | No reasonable expectation of privacy in the shared garbage area. |
| If the area is within curtilage, does that change Maestas's privacy rights? | Curtilage extends privacy from home to adjacent areas. | Even if curtilage applies, the area was shared and not privately controlled. | Even assuming curtilage, Maestas lacked a privacy interest in the area. |
Key Cases Cited
- Minnesota v. Carter, 525 U.S. 83 (1998) (Fourth Amendment personal right; overnight guest status questioned for privacy)
- Poe, 556 F.3d 1113 (10th Cir. 2009) (Fourth Amendment privacy requires a personal expectation; proceeds case-by-case)
- Lundstrom v. Romero, 616 F.3d 1108 (10th Cir. 2010) (courtyard/curtilage analysis factors for privacy)
- Long, 176 F.3d 1304 (10th Cir. 1999) (curtilage and area around home; garbage context distinguished)
- McCaster, 193 F.3d 930 (8th Cir. 1999) (shared hallway/privacy in multi-unit dwellings generally not protected)
- Barrows, 481 F.3d 1246 (10th Cir. 2007) (apartment tenants lack privacy in common areas; items moved into common spaces not left uninspected)