United States v. Salvucci

Background

Two men, John Salvucci and Joseph Zackular, were charged with possessing twelve stolen checks. Police seized the checks while executing a warrant at an apartment rented by one defendant’s mother. The trial court ordered the checks suppressed, and the First Circuit allowed the men to challenge the search under the old “automatic standing” rule because they were charged with possession.

Reasoning

The Court reexamined the Jones rule that automatically let people charged with possession contest searches without proving a personal privacy interest. The majority concluded that later decisions changed the legal landscape: testimony at suppression hearings is generally protected from use as proof of guilt, and possession of an item does not always show a privacy interest in the searched place. For those reasons, the Court overruled automatic standing and said only people whose own Fourth Amendment privacy rights were violated may use the rule that keeps evidence out.

Real world impact

After this decision, defendants charged with possessing seized items must show they had a personal expectation of privacy in the area searched to suppress evidence. That will make it harder to exclude evidence when defendants cannot show a privacy interest. The Court sent the case back so the two defendants can try to prove their own Fourth Amendment rights were violated.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Marshall, joined by Justice Brennan, dissented. He warned that overruling Jones forces some defendants to choose between testifying and risking impeachment or abandoning suppression claims, and defended automatic standing as protective and practical.