U.S. v. Sweeney

In prosecution on armed robbery and firearm charges, Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s motion to suppress warrantless seizure of defendant’s firearm found by police in crawl space in basement of apartment building, where tenants and others did their laundry. Defendant failed to establish, for purposes of instant 4^th Amendment claim, that police had trespassed on one of his protected property interests, where, although he lived on second floor of said apartment building, he had no exclusive control over basement area of apartment building. Moreover, although building owner could have excluded police from basement area, defendant could not have excluded anyone from basement. Ct. further found that instant basement was not part of curtilage to defendant’s apartment, where: (1) basement was remote to defendant’s apartment; (2) basement was not enclosed and intimate to defendant’s apartment; and (3) defendant had no use of basement that was tied to his apartment. Also, defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy, where basement was shared by all tenants.