United States v. Alan Nohara
Opinion
Opinion
Sneed, J.
Appellant Alan Nohara (“Nohara”) appeals his conviction for distributing methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a). The primary issue is whether Nohara had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the hallway outside his apartment in his high security, high rise apartment building. We hold that he did not and affirm.
I.
FACTS AND PRIOR PROCEEDINGS
At 11:40 p.m. on February 6, 1992, DEA agents arrested Barry Nobrega (“Nobrega”) for possession of methamphetamine. Nobre-ga agreed to cooperate against his supplier, Nohara. Nobrega told the agents he had been “fronted” nine grams of methamphetamine by Nohara at about 9:00 p.m. that night, had made a partial payment, but owed Nohara for the balance. Nobrega then accompanied and directed the agents to the Craigside Condominium, where Nobrega said Nohara lived.
The Craigside is a high security, high rise apartment building. It has twenty-seven stories with seven apartments per floor. There are twenty-four hour security guards on duty. Residents can monitor the entrances to the building and garage on their own television sets. The elevator conveys evening guests directly and solely to their hosts’ floors.