Marcus Sanders v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
49A05-1605-CR-971
| Ind. Ct. App. | Dec 13, 2016Background
- On Dec. 3, 2015, Marion County Deputy Brandon Stewart, in uniform and working as a courtesy officer at an apartment complex, observed Marcus Sanders strike a parking-lot curb twice while moving between spaces.
- Deputy Stewart stopped to investigate suspected intoxication; Sanders began to exit but complied with an instruction to remain in the vehicle and left the door open.
- Deputy Stewart observed a clear baggie containing a green leafy substance in the doorframe in plain view, seized it, and testing later confirmed marijuana.
- Sanders was charged with possession of marijuana and moved to suppress the evidence obtained during the stop; the trial court denied the motion after a bench trial and found him guilty.
- On appeal, Sanders argued the warrantless stop violated the Fourth Amendment and Article I, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution, and thus the plain-view seizure was unlawful.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed, finding reasonable suspicion for the investigatory stop and applying the plain-view doctrine to justify seizure.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the warrantless investigatory stop and subsequent seizure were unconstitutional | State: Deputy Stewart had reasonable suspicion to stop Sanders after he struck the curb twice, permitting investigation and seizure under plain view | Sanders: Two curb strikes were innocuous parking maneuvers; the stop lacked reasonable suspicion and so the plain-view seizure was unlawful | Court: Stop was a lawful Terry investigatory stop (reasonable suspicion) and plain-view seizure was lawful; conviction affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (authorizes brief investigatory stops based on reasonable, articulable suspicion)
- United States v. Sokolow, 490 U.S. 1 (1989) (clarifies reasonable-suspicion standard for stops)
- Robinson v. State, 5 N.E.3d 362 (Ind. 2014) (held reasonable suspicion where vehicle crossed fog line twice; terry stop permissible)
- Litchfield v. State, 824 N.E.2d 356 (Ind. 2005) (sets three-factor test for Indiana constitutional reasonableness inquiry)
- Horton v. California, 496 U.S. 128 (1990) (plain-view doctrine requires lawful vantage, immediately apparent incriminating nature, and lawful access)
- Houser v. State, 678 N.E.2d 95 (Ind. 1997) (applies plain-view conditions under Indiana law)