ILNews

Appeals court overturns suppression of evidence gathered in search

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A special judge in Orange Circuit Court erred in suppressing evidence obtained during the execution of a search warrant that led to a man’s arrest on Class D felony charges of possession of marijuana, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled Friday.

“Concluding that the search warrant was supported by probable cause, we reverse and remand,” Judge Paul Mathias wrote for the panel.

In State of Indiana v. Douglas E. Shipman, 59A01-1210-CR-471, Shipman successfully argued at the trial court that a warrant to search his home based on the tip of a 17-year-old burglary suspect should be suppressed.

The juvenile’s statements, “were sufficient to allow the issuing magistrate to make a practical, commonsense decision that there was a fair probability that evidence of dealing in and possession of marijuana would be found in Shipman’s home,” Mathias wrote. “The trial court, as a reviewing court, abused its discretion in overruling this determination.”

“There was no reason to suppress the evidence pursuant to the exclusionary rule,” Mathias wrote. “We therefore reverse the order of the trial court granting Shipman’s motion to suppress and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”


 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Jurisdiction or not
    If a person has not harmed another person or damaged any property or violated another persons rights, the court cannot have jurisdiction over them, unless they give it to them, so don't! If arrested to not post bail, do not hire an attorney, appear as ordered and state you are doing so involuntarily and do not enter a plea, invoke your 5th amendment rights, the right to remain silent!
  • Bogus ruling by COA
    If one person tipping police is probable cause, one person could potentially get every persons home in the United States searched. Heresay is not probable cause and this ruling is a joke. Appears that we are back to picking names from a hat to appoint judges to the COA! If you don't know your rights, you don't have any and that is the way the courts like it.
  • Marijuana conviction
    Why are we still putting people in prison for smoking and possessing marijuana?

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT
    Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
    1. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

    2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

    3. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

    4. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

    5. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

    ADVERTISEMENT