Does a passenger have standing to challenge the search of his vehicle?

Respondent contends preliminarily that defendant did not have a legitimate expectation of privacy in the searched vehicle and thus had no standing to bring a suppression motion. However, defendant is challenging only the stop, and not the search, of the vehicle. As independent Fourth Amendment events, the initial stop and later search require separate analyses. To suppress evidence based on an unconstitutional seizure, defendant need not establish an expectation of privacy in the vehicle, but must demonstrate that "his own Fourth Amendment rights were violated." (Rakas v. Illinois (1978) 439 U.S. 128, 132 [58 L.Ed.2d 387, 394].) His status as a passenger does not prohibit him from establishing a personal violation resulting from the stop. "When a police officer makes a traffic stop, the driver of the car is seized within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. . . . [A] passenger is seized as well and so may challenge the constitutionality of the stop." (Brendlin v. California (2007) ___ U.S. ___ [168 L.Ed.2d 132, 136].)