« Ind. Courts - "County juvenile court shows off pioneering mental health diversion program" | Main | Ind. Decisions - Supreme Court posts employment decision late this afternoon »

Tuesday, June 17, 2008

Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 1 today (and 11 NFP)

For publication opinions today (1):

In Damen Holly v. State of Indiana , a 10-page opinion, Judge Vaidik writes:

Damen Holly drove a car that was registered to someone whose driver’s license was suspended. A police officer conducted a license plate check and learned that the car’s owner had a suspended license and pulled Holly over. During the course of the stop, marijuana was found in the car, and Holly was subsequently convicted of possession of marijuana as a Class A misdemeanor. We determine that the officer lacked reasonable suspicion to stop Holly and that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting the marijuana into evidence. Because the evidence is otherwise insufficient to support Holly’s conviction, we reverse. * * *

The question before us is whether Officer Ross’s knowledge that the registered owner of the vehicle driven by Holly had a suspended license created a reasonable suspicion that criminal activity was afoot when he saw the vehicle being driven. We conclude that it did not. * * *

A police officer’s knowledge that an owner of a vehicle may not lawfully drive creates reasonable suspicion of criminal activity only where the officer has reason to believe that the owner is actually driving the vehicle. In a case such as this where the officer has observed absolutely nothing that would indicate that the driver of the vehicle is the owner and the officer has no reason to believe that the vehicle is stolen or that a law is otherwise being broken, the officer lacks objective justification for conducting an investigatory stop. * * * Thus, we conclude that Officer Ross did not have reasonable suspicion that criminal activity was afoot when he conducted an investigatory stop of the vehicle driven by Holly. The evidence collected as a result of this stop, including the marijuana seized during the search and Holly’s subsequent admission that he owned the marijuana, was therefore inadmissible under the Fourth Amendment, and the trial court abused its discretion in admitting it. The remaining evidence is insufficient to support Holly’s conviction for possession of marijuana, and his conviction must be reversed.

NFP civil opinions today (1):

Lonnie Garner, Jr. v. Tracy Tomkiewicz (NFP) - "Garner is incarcerated at Wabash Valley Correctional Facility, where Aramark provides food services. Garner and other inmates work in the kitchen facilities operated by Aramark, but none is employed by Aramark. Instead, the Indiana Department of Correction (“DOC”) selects, assigns, and compensates the inmates for their services. Garner sued Aramark and its regional vice president, Tomkiewicz, for $4176 in wages and damages. The trial court granted the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Garner now appeals. * * *

Garner designated no evidence to suggest that Aramark or Tomkiewicz owed him anything. The trial court did not err in granting the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment."

NFP criminal opinions today (10):

Taurus Butler v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Jonathan S. Nixon v. State of Indiana (NFP)

John Houts v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Timothy Schaub v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Shamir R. Robinson v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Crystal Lewis-Wilson v. State of Indiana (NFP)

David Patrick v. State of Indiana (NFP)

John R. Glenn v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Christopher Decker v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Amanda J. Crose v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Posted by Marcia Oddi on June 17, 2008 12:21 PM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions