Vasquez, Elias Esequiel
PD-0235-15
| Tex. | Mar 2, 2015Background
- On Feb 27, 2011 Elias Vasquez (driving his mother’s 2005 GMC Canyon with her permission) was in a collision that killed Guillermo Olivares III and injured Yadira Pena; Vasquez later pled guilty to intoxication manslaughter and intoxication assault and received a jury-assessed sentence.
- The GMC Canyon was towed to a salvage yard after the crash and remained there for months; the vehicle ultimately received a nonrepairable title and was listed in State Farm records.
- Approximately eleven months after the accident, a Starr County DA investigator visited the salvage yard with a grand-jury subpoena for the other vehicle’s EDR but initially received the wrong vehicle’s EDR.
- About a week later the investigator returned (without paperwork) and obtained the EDR from the GMC Canyon; Vasquez moved to suppress the EDR as illegally obtained and argued he retained Fourth Amendment protection.
- The trial court denied the suppression motion; on appeal the Fourth Court of Appeals affirmed, concluding Vasquez had abandoned the vehicle and therefore lacked standing to challenge the seizure of the EDR.
Issues
| Issue | Vasquez's Argument | State’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Vasquez had standing to challenge seizure of the vehicle’s EDR | Vasquez: He did not abandon the vehicle; he was incapacitated at the scene, the State retained control, abandonment was not shown and was not raised at trial | State: Vasquez failed to retain a reasonable expectation of privacy because he effectively abandoned the vehicle by leaving it at the salvage yard; police lawfully obtained the EDR | Court: Vasquez abandoned any reasonable expectation of privacy in the vehicle; he lacked standing and suppression was properly denied |
Key Cases Cited
- McDuff v. State, 939 S.W.2d 607 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997) (abandonment requires intent to relinquish property interest and not be caused by police misconduct)
- Matthews v. State, 431 S.W.3d 596 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014) (nonowner driver may have standing if given consent to use vehicle; standing is a threshold question)
- Miller v. State, 335 S.W.3d 847 (Tex. App.—Austin 2011) (distinguishes voluntary from involuntary abandonment where abandonment was unintentional)
- Abel v. United States, 362 U.S. 217 (U.S. 1960) (items thrown away can be seized because defendant abandoned them)