Lanham v. State
937 N.E.2d 419
Ind. Ct. App.2010Background
- Lanham was convicted of Possession of Marijuana (Class D) and Possession of Paraphernalia (Class A) after a search of his home.
- M.B., then fourteen, neighbor of Lanham, smoked with him and bought a pre-rolled joint for $5.
- M.B. later informed a deputy that she had seen Lanham retrieve marijuana from a coffee can and had seen paraphernalia in the home.
- Deputy White obtained a search warrant; deputies retrieved marijuana, scales, baggies, and pipes from Lanham's residence.
- Lanham moved to suppress the evidence, arguing M.B. was unreliable; the motion was denied and trial proceeded.
- The appellate court affirmed the conviction, holding the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of evidence from warrant based on hearsay | Lanham: warrant lacked probable cause due to unreliable informant. | State: waiver applies; magistrate had substantial basis for probable cause; evidence admissible. | No abuse; probable cause supported; waiver notwithstanding, admissibility affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Packer v. State, 800 N.E.2d 574 (Ind.Ct.App.2003) (abuse of discretion standard for evidentiary admissibility)
- Washington v. State, 784 N.E.2d 584 (Ind.Ct.App.2003) (contemporaneous objection required to preserve suppression issues)
- State v. Spillers, 847 N.E.2d 949 (Ind.2006) (reliability of informants and hearsay in probable cause)
- Merritt v. State, 803 N.E.2d 257 (Ind.Ct.App.2004) (probable cause framework and totality of circumstances)
- Bowles v. State, 820 N.E.2d 739 (Ind.Ct.App.2005) (probable cause determined on a fact-by-fact basis)
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (U.S.S.Ct.1983) (totality-of-the-circumstances approach to probable cause)
- Jervis v. State, 679 N.E.2d 875 (Ind.1997) (declarant’s penal interest as reliability factor)
- Jaggers v. State, 687 N.E.2d 180 (Ind.1997) (informant credibility and corroboration considerations)
- State v. Spillers, 847 N.E.2d 949 (Ind.2006) (informant reliability standards and corroboration requirements)