United States v. Pabon
2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24432, 603 F. Supp. 2d 406, 2009 WL 765019 (2009)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A parolee with an outstanding arrest warrant lacks a reasonable expectation of privacy in a third party's residence and therefore cannot vicariously assert the third party's Fourth Amendment rights to challenge the legality of his own arrest therein. Additionally, questions asked by police to clarify biographical data for administrative booking purposes fall under the 'routine booking question' exception and do not constitute interrogation under Miranda.
Facts:
- An arrest warrant was issued for Rafael Pabon for violating the conditions of his parole.
- A parole officer received information that Pabon was residing at Apartment H-22.
- After the legal resident of H-22 consented to a search, officers found a bag containing a handgun and Pabon's correctional facility ID.
- The resident of H-22 then contacted Pabon, who instructed her to bring the apartment key to him at Apartment F-6, which belonged to Toni Yager.
- After the key was delivered, the resident informed officers that Pabon was alone inside Apartment F-6.
- Toni Yager, the legal resident of Apartment F-6, provided written consent for officers to enter her apartment.
- Officers entered Apartment F-6 and arrested Pabon.
Procedural Posture:
- Rafael Pabon was charged in a one-count indictment in the U.S. District Court with being a felon in possession of a firearm.
- Pabon was arraigned before a U.S. Magistrate Judge.
- Pabon filed a motion to suppress statements made to police and physical evidence seized from his person at the time of his arrest.
- The District Court conducted a multi-day evidentiary hearing on the suppression motion.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a parolee with an outstanding arrest warrant have a reasonable expectation of privacy in a third party's residence, thereby giving him standing to challenge his arrest therein as a violation of his Fourth Amendment rights?
Opinions:
Majority - Kahn, District Judge
No, a parolee with an outstanding arrest warrant does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in a third party's home sufficient to challenge his arrest there. The court denied the motion to suppress on three primary grounds. First, Pabon failed to demonstrate a personal, reasonable expectation of privacy in Apartment F-6; his mere presence was insufficient. Second, Fourth Amendment rights are personal and cannot be asserted vicariously; Pabon cannot challenge his arrest by raising the privacy rights of Toni Yager, the apartment's resident. Allowing this would grant him greater rights in a third party's home than in his own, contrary to the principles of Payton v. New York. Third, as a parolee, and particularly as a known parole absconder, Pabon has a severely diminished expectation of privacy that society does not recognize as legitimate, which further prevents him from mounting a Fourth Amendment challenge. The court also held that Pabon's statement about his address was admissible under the 'routine booking question' exception to Miranda, as the officer's question was intended to clarify biographical information for administrative purposes, not to elicit an incriminating response.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the legal principle that parolees possess severely limited Fourth Amendment rights due to their status. It clarifies that this diminished expectation of privacy extends to their presence in a third party's home, preventing them from using the homeowner's privacy rights as a shield against a valid arrest warrant. The case also provides a clear application of the 'routine booking question' exception, affirming that officers may ask clarifying follow-up questions about pedigree information without providing Miranda warnings, provided the questions are reasonably related to administrative concerns rather than investigation.
