Andre Graham v. State of Indiana
971 N.E.2d 713
Ind. Ct. App.2012Background
- Graham was convicted in Clark Circuit Court of multiple drug offenses, including Class A felony dealing in cocaine and Class B felony dealing in a Schedule III substance, along with possession charges.
- Police stopped Graham on May 28, 2010 for failing to signal a lane change; two passengers were with him and one appeared intoxicated.
- Graham admitted illegal hydrocodone in his pocket; cocaine was later found hidden on him, leading to arrest.
- Graham moved to suppress the seized drugs, but the trial court denied the motion and evidence was admitted at trial.
- The State pursued four Class A felonies (two dealing, two possession), plus a Class B and Class D felony; the jury convicted on the dealing and at least one possession charge.
- Graham appeals on (1) the admissibility of the evidence seized during the stop and (2) the sufficiency of evidence proving intent to deal the drugs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the traffic-stop evidence was admissible under the Fourth Amendment | Graham argues the stop was unlawfully prolonged | State contends stop duration was reasonable and questions did not violate rights | Evidence admissible; no Fourth Amendment violation |
| Whether there was sufficient evidence Graham intended to deal the drugs | State had to prove intent to deliver; Graham admits not selling for profit | Delivery can be shown by sharing with others; transfers need not be profit-driven | Sufficient evidence of intent to deliver; convictions affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Washington v. United States, 898 N.E.2d 1200 (Ind. 2008) (drug/weapon questions during a traffic stop permitted; totality of circumstances governs reasonableness)
- Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491 () (temporary detention must be limited to completing the stop's purpose)
- Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405 () (unreasonable prolongation of stop violates Fourth Amendment if beyond necessary duration)
- Whren v. United States, 517 U.S. 806 () (detention based on traffic violation legitimate; pretext allowed so long as stop was valid at inception)
- Lundquist v. State, 834 N.E.2d 1061 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (admissibility of evidence approached on same framework as suppression)