Thursday, July 07, 2016
Ind. Decisions - Supreme Court decides one today, re a police entry
In Timmie Bradley v. State of Indiana, an 8-page, 5-0 opinion, Justice David writes:
This case involves whether Bryant Beatty had apparent authority to consent to police entry into Defendant, Timmie Bradley’s, home. Specifically, does a houseguest, who happens to answer the door to a home shortly after he knocked to gain entry himself, have the apparent authority to consent to police entry? Under the facts and circumstances of this case, we hold that he does not.
Bradley also challenges the protective sweep of his home that occurred after police entered. However, we need not address the merits of his argument regarding the protective sweep. Because police did not have a warrant, or warrant exception, to justify entry into the home in the first place, the subsequent warrantless police searches, including the protective sweep, were unlawful and thus, the fruits of those searches must be suppressed. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s denial of Bradley’s motion to suppress all evidence seized in the search of his home.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on July 7, 2016 03:51 PM
Posted to Ind. Sup.Ct. Decisions