Bruce Ashby v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
39A01-1610-CR-2341
| Ind. Ct. App. | Aug 4, 2017Background
- In August 2015, a concerned citizen, Harry Mercer, told Madison police that a man named “Bruce” (identified as Bruce Ashby) had offered to sell him Percocet (oxycodone/acetaminophen) and, at detectives’ direction, sent Ashby texts arranging a purchase.
- Ashby replied by text with a price and location; detectives used Callyo software to monitor/record calls and confirmed Ashby was awaiting the buyer at the agreed location.
- Detectives approached Ashby, called his phone to verify identity, and, after telling him they had information he would sell pills, asked if he had pills; they searched him and found a cigarette pack with 19 round white pills.
- One pill tested positive for oxycodone and weighed 0.56 g; the remaining 18 pills visually matched the tested pill and together weighed 10.02 g (total 10.58 g).
- Ashby was charged with attempted dealing and dealing in a narcotic (Level 2 felonies alleged). He moved to suppress; the trial court denied the motion, an interlocutory appeal was declined, and after a bench trial Ashby was convicted of Level 2 felony attempted dealing and sentenced to 20 years.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by treating the prior suppression ruling as res judicata | State argued the suppression denial stood and evidence was admissible | Ashby argued the pretrial denial was not final and the court improperly refused further consideration | Court: Treating suppression ruling as res judicata was error but harmless; preserved objection sufficed, no reversible harm |
| Whether admitting evidence from the warrantless search was an abuse of discretion (Fourth Amendment) | State: Search was incident to a lawful arrest because probable cause existed before the search | Ashby: Detectives lacked probable cause to arrest/search him before finding pills; thus search violated the Fourth Amendment | Court: Probable cause existed (informant tip, texts, monitored calls, detectives’ observations); search incident to arrest was lawful and evidence admissible |
| Sufficiency to support Level 2 attempted dealing (≥10 grams oxycodone) | State: Lab tested one pill as oxycodone and visually matched remaining pills; total weight exceeded 10 grams | Ashby: Only one pill was chemically confirmed; State didn’t prove all 19 contained oxycodone, so weight of oxycodone not shown | Court: Reasonable inference that remaining pills matched tested pill; total weight (10.58 g) sufficed to prove ≥10 g narcotic for Level 2 attempt |
Key Cases Cited
- Joyner v. State, 678 N.E.2d 386 (Ind. 1997) (pretrial suppression rulings are not final judgments for res judicata purposes)
- Gasaway v. State, 231 N.E.2d 513 (Ind. 1967) (pretrial suppression ruling is not a final judgment)
- Clark v. State, 994 N.E.2d 252 (Ind. 2013) (trial court has broad discretion on admissibility; reversal only for abuse affecting substantial rights)
- Kelly v. State, 997 N.E.2d 1045 (Ind. 2013) (constitutional challenges to search/seizure reviewed de novo)
- Fentress v. State, 863 N.E.2d 420 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (search incident to lawful arrest exception and probable cause standards)
- Garcia v. State, 47 N.E.3d 1196 (Ind. 2016) (search incident to arrest lawful regardless of what it reveals)
- Boggs v. State, 928 N.E.2d 855 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (drug weight proven by measured weight or by reasonable inference from quantity)
- Drane v. State, 867 N.E.2d 144 (Ind. 2007) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- Berry v. State, 704 N.E.2d 462 (Ind. 1998) (State bears burden to prove an exception to the warrant requirement)