In response, the State argues that Voyles had no expectation of privacy in his work computer because it was owned by the school district, located in a public classroom designed for teaching students, and available for use by substitute teachers. The purpose of both the Fourth Amendment and Article I, section 9 of the Texas Constitution, “is to safeguard an individual’s legitimate expectation of privacy from unreasonable governmental intrusions.” Villarreal v. State, 935 S.W.2d 134, 138 (Tex.Crim.App.1996). A defendant has standing to challenge the admission of evidence obtained by an intrusion by the government or a private individual only if he had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the place invaded. Id.; Davis v. State, 119 S.W.3d 359, 367 (Tex.App.-Waco 2003, pet. filed) (<HOLDING>). The defendant, as the party asserting the
holding that the defendant lacked a reasonable expectation of privacy in an apartment bmldings common entrance holding that defendants lacked a reasonable expectation of privacy in common area of residential building recognizing record supported determination that defendant lacked expectation of privacy in house holding that defendant staying in abandoned house had no legitimate expectation of privacy in the house despite having a key to the house and the ability to let people in and out of it holding that defendant lacked reasonable expectation of privacy in garbage located outside curtilage of home