non-"community property" jurisdiction?! (Score 1)

What's gotten people burned in several cases I've read about is that they were driving vehicles they didn't own, and the courts make a distinction there. Does the car you regularly drive have your name on the title or your wife's? That's exactly what got one guy's 4th amendment defense thrown out - his wife 'owned' the car he used, so they weren't tracking his property and he didn't have standing.

from Wikipedia under Community Property:

Joint ownership is automatically presumed by law in the absence of specific evidence that would point to a contrary conclusion for a particular piece of property.[1] The community property system is usually justified by the idea that such joint ownership recognizes the theoretically equal contributions of both spouses to the creation and operation of the family unit.[2]

So, unless the wife was claiming sole ownership or these events occurred in a non-community property jurisdiction, he *IS* half-owner of the car *even if he not on the title*!

IANAL, but this seems to me that 4th amendment applies in this case -- specifically due to CO-ownership.

If she can take half, then he (implicitly) owns the other half... Something does not smell right here...