Carjacker's Use Of Uncle's Phone Implicates Business Rights

Law360, New York (October 7, 2015, 11:20 AM EDT) -- A carjacking case out of district court in Michigan makes for an uncommon backdrop in the white collar section of a legal publication, but as unlikely as that may be, that is where we begin. The case at issue, United States v. Scott, involves a defendant indicted for making a false statement to law enforcement about whether he possessed a mobile phone used by a suspected carjacker. The defendant, Curtis Scott, sought to suppress evidence taken from the phone based on his status as the phone's subscriber and account owner. Scott's problem? He had given the phone to his nephew, who was the one using it. In rejecting Scott's motions to suppress the evidence seized from the phone, the court held that without more, the "subscriber" of a mobile phone given to a third party lacks standing to challenge the admission of evidence taken from the phone....

Law360 is on it, so you are, too.

A Law360 subscription puts you at the center of fast-moving legal issues, trends and developments so you can act with speed and confidence. Over 200 articles are published daily across more than 60 topics, industries, practice areas and jurisdictions.


A Law360 subscription includes features such as

  • Daily newsletters
  • Expert analysis
  • Mobile app
  • Advanced search
  • Judge information
  • Real-time alerts
  • 450K+ searchable archived articles

And more!

Experience Law360 today with a free 7-day trial.

Start Free Trial

Already a subscriber? Click here to login

Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Ask a question!