While Defendant was in jail on a procuring charge, his landlord called the police because rent had not been paid and because he detected a disagreeable odor coming from Defendant's apartment into the hallways. The police officer who responded to the call knew that Defendant was in jail. He recognized the stench coming from Defendant's apartment as that of  decomposing flesh and, without waiting to obtain a warrant and using the landlord's passkey, entered the apartment with the landlord's consent. The lease to these premises gave the landlord a right of entry, at any reasonable hour, for the purpose of making repairs. The police officer found a large trunk in the bedroom which seemed to be the source of the odor. Upon breaking it open, he found the remains of Rosette, Defendant's former mistress. "If Defendant undertakes to challenge the search of his apartment, he has
standing, because the items seized in the search were incriminating in nature.  standing, because he still has a sufficient interest in the apartment even while in jail.  no standing, because his landlord authorized the search.  no standing, because he was out of the apartment when the search occurred and had not paid his rent
Question: While Defendant was in jail on a procuring charge, his landlord called the police because rent had not been paid and because he detected a disagreeable odor coming from Defendant's apartment into the hallways. The police officer who responded to the call knew that Defendant was in jail. He recognized the stench coming from Defendant's apartment as that of  decomposing flesh and, without waiting to obtain a warrant and using the landlord's passkey, entered the apartment with the landlord's consent. The lease to these premises gave the landlord a right of entry, at any reasonable hour, for the purpose of making repairs. The police officer found a large trunk in the bedroom which seemed to be the source of the odor. Upon breaking it open, he found the remains of Rosette, Defendant's former mistress. "If Defendant undertakes to challenge the search of his apartment, he has
A. standing, because the items seized in the search were incriminating in nature. 
B. standing, because he still has a sufficient interest in the apartment even while in jail. 
C. no standing, because his landlord authorized the search. 
D. no standing, because he was out of the apartment when the search occurred and had not paid his rent
Answer: