Practice question
A defendant seeks suppression solely because officers violated an unrelated neighbor’s search rights. The defendant had no protected interest in the searched premises or seized property and establishes no invasion of her own rights. Does another person’s violation alone provide her constitutional search objection?
- No; the search objection is personal, and she must establish the relevant invasion of her own rights.
- Yes; every defendant may assert every stranger’s rights.
- Yes; neighboring homes are always one constitutional household.
- Yes; learning about a search transfers the owner’s rights.
- No, because the neighbor can never object either.
Legal references
- Stonehill v. Diokno, G.R. No. L-19550, June 19, 1967, main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1967/jun1967/gr_l-19550_1967.html
- 1987 Constitution, Article III, Sections 2 and 3(2): https://lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.