Abstract
This Note argues that the holding of the Court’s past decisions denying passengers standing to challenge searches comports neither with logic nor with its recent decision in Brendlin, and should there fore be changed. Part II explains the development of the law regarding passenger standing in searches, which Part III explains the development of the law regarding passenger in seizures. Part IV argues that the differing approaches to passenger standing are theoretically inconsistent and cannot be reconciled. Part V addresses the reason for this inconsistency; namely, the Court’s erroneous determinations of how a “reasonable” person feels during searches and seizures, and the Court’s poor judgment of societal perceptions of reasonable behavior. Finally, Part VI offers a recommendation for a proper resolution of the two positions.
Recommended Citation
Dante P. Trevisani,
Passenger Standing to Challenge Searches and Seizures: A Distinction Without a Constitutional Difference,
61 Fla. L. Rev.
329
(2009).
Available at: https://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/flr/vol61/iss2/4