Deft's subjective expectation that the unlocked common hallway outside his apartment door was within the curtilage of his residence was objectively unreasonable, as deft had insufficient control over the space.
Placement of a hidden camera on the hallway wall opposite the deft's door did not violate the right to privacy, as it only recorded when the deft's door was opened, only short clips of video were filmed, and the deft would not have had the power to exclude law enforcement from being there and observing the same acts, even for extended periods.