Unpublished Disposition, 841 F.2d 1130 (9th Cir. 1988)

MEMORANDUM^** 

John and Paulette Murphy were convicted of manufacturing and distributing marijuana and conspiracy to manufacture and distribute marijuana. On appeal, both defendants challenge the district court's denial of their motion to suppress evidence found at their residence.

Paulette Murphy claims that the search was unlawful because the search warrant used was based on items found in an earlier search of a different property owned by Mrs. Murphy's brother-in-law, John Tudor. Tudor also owned the residence Mr. and Mrs. Murphy leased. Whatever the merits of Mrs. Murphy's assertion that the prior search was illegal, that claim cannot justify suppressing evidence found in the search of the Murphy residence. Paulette Murphy has no standing to challenge the search of the other property; she had no legitimate expectation of privacy in that property. See United States v. Nadler, 698 F.2d 995, 998-99 (9th Cir. 1983).

John Murphy claims that the search of the residence was not based on probable cause. This argument is without merit. The police had discovered that marijuana was being grown and harvested on the property that Mr. and Mrs. Murphy were leasing. The police sought to determine who was responsible for this illegal activity. In granting a search warrant, the magistrate reasonably concluded that there was probable cause for believing that evidence indicating ownership and control of a piece of property could be found in the residence situated on that property. That the police may have had prior information on that point is irrelevant.

For the reasons given above, the convictions are affirmed.