Floyd Weddle v. State of Indiana - 5/22/13

Back to TopPrintE-mail
Wednesday  May 22, 2013 
10:00 AM  EST

10 a.m. 73A01-1209-CR-45. The appellant-defendant, Floyd Weddle, appeals his convictions for several drug-related offenses, including manufacturing methamphetamine, a class A felony, and possession of methamphetamine, a class B felony.  Weddle claims the trial court erred in admitting evidence at trial because the police officers’ search of a residence was pretextual in nature and an alleged “protective sweep” of the house was not limited in scope and was too broad.  As a result, Weddle maintains the police officers’ actions violated his constitutional rights under the Fourth Amendment and Article I, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution.

Back to Events
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

Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. What is this, the Ind Supreme Court thinking that there is a separation of powers and limited enumerated powers as delegated by a dusty old document? Such eighteen century thinking, so rare and unwanted by the elites in this modern age. Dictate to us, dictate over us, the massess are chanting! George Soros agrees. Time to change with times Ind Supreme Court, says all President Snows. Rule by executive decree is the new black.

  2. I made the same argument before a commission of the Indiana Supreme Court and then to the fedeal district and federal appellate courts. Fell flat. So very glad to read that some judges still beleive that evidentiary foundations matter.

  3. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  4. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  5. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.