J.K. v. State of Indiana - 3/7/14

Back to TopPrintE-mail
Friday  March 7, 2014 
10:20 AM  EST

10:20 a.m. 66A03-1306-JS-220. Walden Inn and Conference Center, DePauw University. J.K was adjudicated delinquent for acts of illegal possession and illegal consumption of an alcoholic beverage and aiding illegal consumption of an alcoholic beverage.  J.K. argues the juvenile court admitted evidence obtained in violation of his rights under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.  Police received a complaint regarding juveniles making noise in the neighborhood and arrived at J.K.’s residence at approximately 1 a.m.  Two officers went around each side of the residence while a third officer remained at the front, knocking on the door.  Believing that underage drinking was taking place inside, the officers remained at the residence for over an hour until two juveniles, including J.K., eventually opened the front door.  An officer spoke with J.K.’s mother via telephone, and the officers entered the residence without a warrant..  J.K. argues any consent to enter was tainted by an unconstitutionally lengthy “knock-and-talk.”  The State contends exigent circumstances allowed for the warrantless entry, regardless of consent.  
 

Back to Events
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Contact Lea Shelemey attorney in porter county Indiana. She just helped us win our case...she is awesome...

  2. We won!!!! It was a long expensive battle but we did it. I just wanted people to know it is possible. And if someone can point me I. The right direction to help change the way the courts look as grandparents as only grandparents. The courts assume the parent does what is in the best interest of the child...and the court is wrong. A lot of the time it is spite and vindictiveness that separates grandparents and grandchildren. It should not have been this long and hard and expensive...Something needs to change...

  3. Typo on # of Indiana counties

  4. The Supreme Court is very proud that they are Giving a billion dollar public company from Texas who owns Odyssey a statewide monopoly which consultants have said is not unnecessary but worse they have already cost Hoosiers well over $100 MILLION, costing tens of millions every year and Odyssey is still not connected statewide which is in violation of state law. The Supreme Court is using taxpayer money and Odyssey to compete against a Hoosier company who has the only system in Indiana that is connected statewide and still has 40 of the 82 counties despite the massive spending and unnecessary attacks

  5. Here's a recent resource regarding steps that should be taken for removal from the IN sex offender registry. I haven't found anything as comprehensive as of yet. Hopefully this is helpful - http://www.chjrlaw.com/removal-indiana-sex-offender-registry/

ADVERTISEMENT