952 N.E.2d 305
Ind. Ct. App.2011Background
- Johnson's computer was brought to Computer Bay for repair and a folder titled 'Had sex with a 12 year old' was discovered by an employee.
- Police opened one folder within that folder and then took the hard drive to the police station as evidence; Johnson was informed a detective would contact him.
- Detective Rosado prepared a search warrant and affidavit on May 19, 2009 and submitted them to the Schererville Town Court for signing by Judge Anderson.
- Rosado received the forms back; neither form bore a file mark and the court could not locate the affidavit or warrant in its records.
- The State charged Johnson with possession of child pornography; Johnson moved to suppress, arguing improper filing and lack of probable cause; the trial court denied the motion.
- On appeal, the court held that the affidavit was not properly filed but upheld the evidence's admission under the good faith exception.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether improper filing invalidates the warrant | Johnson argues the warrant was invalid due to improper filing under I.C. 35-33-5-2(a). | Johnson contends the failure to properly file the affidavit invalidates the seizure. | No; the court found the affidavit not properly filed but admissibility supported by good faith. |
| Whether the good faith exception applies | Johnson asserts the lack of proper filing negates good faith. | State argues officers reasonably relied on a valid warrant and filing, so evidence should be admitted. | Held that the good faith exception applies. |
| Whether probable cause supported the warrant | Johnson emphasizes lack of probable cause basing on limited preliminary search. | State asserts probable cause existed given the folder title and contents. | Probable cause found; warrant supported. |
Key Cases Cited
- Callender v. State, 193 Ind. 91, 138 N.E. 817 (Ind. 1923) (precludes use of seized property when warrant is invalid)
- Wilson v. State, 263 Ind. 469, 333 N.E.2d 755 (Ind. 1975) (filing vs. exhibiting affidavits; court certificate as record)
- Moseby v. State, 872 N.E.2d 189 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (affidavit filing with judge vs. clerk; timing considerations)
- Jefferson v. State, 891 N.E.2d 77 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (language of warrant showing filing status)
- Bowles v. State, 820 N.E.2d 739 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (late filing; substantial compliance doctrine)
- Mason v. State, 829 N.E.2d 1010 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (late filing; implied compliance limitations)
- Rucker v. State, 861 N.E.2d 1241 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (delayed filing; compliance standards)
- Holly v. State, 918 N.E.2d 323 (Ind. 2009) (probable cause timing post-discovery of owner)
- Abbott v. State, 950 N.E.2d 357 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (probable cause standard; good faith)
- Hoop v. State, 909 N.E.2d 463 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (good faith exception limitations)
- Rice v. State, 916 N.E.2d 296 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (standard for abuse of discretion in suppression rulings)