the Sixth Circuit that a defendant has no objectively reasonable expectation of privacy in a hangar that he does not control. Porter, 701 F.2d at 1164-65. Here, Mr. Lyddon maintained control over the hangar at all times, the hangar stored aircraft and equipment for Mr. Lyddon and other customers, and Mr. Ruiz had no access to the hangar after business hours. Even if Mr. Ruiz had a “subjective expectation of privacy” in the hangar, it was not an “objectively reasonable” one. See Allen, 235 F.3d at 489. Mr. Ruiz correctly contends the affidavit omitted information concerning the security of the hangar that is arguably relevant to whether he had a legitimate expectation of privacy in it. Specifically, the affidavit did not state that Mr. Ruiz paid to 81 S.Ct. 776, 5 L.Ed.2d 828 (1961) (<HOLDING>). But this case is quite different because Mr.
holding landlord may recover from tenant for fire damage caused by tenants negligence regardless of existence of insurance holding that a landlord could not validly consent to the search of a house he had rented to another holding that police officers warrantless search of rented home with consent of landlord but not tenant violated tenants fourth amendment rights holding that a warrantless search of garbage located within the curtilage of the defendants home violated his fourth amendment rights holding search not to violate fourth amendment where officers belief that apparent landlord had the power to consent and that he had not revoked that consent was reasonable emphasis added