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

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Indiana State Bar Association

    Indianapolis Bar Association

    Evansville Bar Association

    Allen County Bar Association

    Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

    facebook
    ADVERTISEMENT
    Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
    1. Well, maybe it's because they are unelected, and, they have a tendency to strike down laws by elected officials from all over the country. When you have been taught that "Democracy" is something almost sacred, then, you will have a tendency to frown on such imperious conduct. Lawyers get acculturated in law school into thinking that this is the very essence of high minded government, but to people who are more heavily than King George ever did, they may not like it. Thanks for the information.

    2. I pd for a bankruptcy years ago with Mr Stiles and just this week received a garnishment from my pay! He never filed it even though he told me he would! Don't let this guy practice law ever again!!!

    3. Excellent initiative on the part of the AG. Thankfully someone takes action against predators taking advantage of people who have already been through the wringer. Well done!

    4. Conour will never turn these funds over to his defrauded clients. He tearfully told the court, and his daughters dutifully pledged in interviews, that his first priority is to repay every dime of the money he stole from his clients. Judge Young bought it, much to the chagrin of Conour’s victims. Why would Conour need the $2,262 anyway? Taxpayers are now supporting him, paying for his housing, utilities, food, healthcare, and clothing. If Conour puts the money anywhere but in the restitution fund, he’s proved, once again, what a con artist he continues to be and that he has never had any intention of repaying his clients. Judge Young will be proven wrong... again; Conour has no remorse and the Judge is one of the many conned.

    5. Pass Legislation to require guilty defendants to pay for the costs of lab work, etc as part of court costs...

    ADVERTISEMENT