No. 19-5671

James Lyle v. United States

Lower Court: Second Circuit
Docketed: 2019-08-22
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: byrd-v-united-states community-caretaking driver's-license exclusive-possession exclusive-possession-and-control fourth-amendment fourth-amendment-search-and-seizure non-criminal-control reasonable-expectation-of-privacy rental-vehicle trunk-access vehicle-search warrant-exception
Key Terms:
FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2020-01-10
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether a person operating a rental vehicle without a valid driver's license has a reasonable expectation of privacy in the vehicle's locked trunk compartment

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

Question Presented Under the Fourth Amendment and Byrd v. United States, 584 U.S. (2018), may a person who operates a rental vehicle without a valid driver’s license nevertheless have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the vehicle’s locked trunk compartment, where the person enjoys exclusive, non-criminal possession and control over the vehicle’s trunk, and where the person has affirmatively exercised their ability to exclude others from the trunk? Second Question Presented When the police seize a vehicle without a warrant or probable cause under the “community caretaking” exception to the Fourth Amendment established in Colorado v. Bertine, 479 U.S. 367 (1987), must the seizure be effected pursuant to a “standard procedure,” as held by the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Seventh, Eighth, Tenth, and D.C. Circuits, or is the warrantless seizure justified as long as a reviewing court can determine on an ad hoc basis that the seizure was reasonable, as the First, Second, Third, and Fifth Circuits have held? i

Docket Entries

2020-01-13
Petition DENIED.
2019-12-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2020.
2019-12-06
Reply of petitioner James Lyle filed.
2019-11-22
Brief of respondent United States of America in opposition filed.
2019-10-23
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including November 22, 2019.
2019-10-22
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 23, 2019 to November 22, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-09-18
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including October 23, 2019.
2019-09-17
Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 23, 2019 to October 23, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-08-19
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 23, 2019)

Attorneys

James Lyle
Daniel Stuart NooterDaniel S. Nooter, Esq., Petitioner
Daniel Stuart NooterDaniel S. Nooter, Esq., Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent