Melvin Levy v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
20A04-1705-CR-1206
| Ind. Ct. App. | Nov 14, 2017Background
- On Aug. 21, 2015, Elkhart police stopped Melvin Levy for an alleged turn-signal violation and observed his SUV parked in a parking lane near the curb.
- Levy told officers he had no insurance; officers decided to impound the SUV while awaiting a tow.
- While preparing the vehicle for tow, Corporal Roundtree searched the SUV and found a revolver under the driver’s seat; Levy was arrested for carrying without a license.
- After the arrest, Corporal Gruber searched Levy and discovered two bags of marijuana.
- Levy moved to suppress the gun and marijuana, arguing the warrantless searches violated the Fourth Amendment; the trial court denied suppression, convicted Levy, and Levy appealed.
- The appellate court reviewed whether the impoundment/inventory exception to the warrant requirement applied, focusing on whether the impoundment was reasonable and adhered to departmental policy.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Levy) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the warrantless search of the SUV was a valid inventory search | Impoundment was lawful (vehicle uninsured/public roadway) and officers followed EPD inventory policy, so the inventory-search exception applies | Impoundment was not justified or shown to follow departmental procedure, so the inventory-search exception does not apply | Search was not a valid inventory search; evidence suppressed and convictions reversed |
| Whether the State met its burden to prove an exception to the warrant requirement | State argued inventory exception applies and relied on officer testimony and a generic EPD inventory policy | Levy argued the State failed to prove the impoundment adhered to established departmental routine/regulation as required | State failed its burden: officer testimony was insufficient and no impoundment-policy evidence showed adherence to procedure |
| Whether failure to contemporaneously object waived suppression claim | State suggested Levy’s trial counsel did not object to admission of evidence, implying waiver | Levy and record show the suppression motion and combined bench trial served as the objection; no further contemporaneous objection was required | No waiver; the suppression issue was preserved by motion and trial structure |
| Admissibility of marijuana found during search incident to arrest | State maintained arrest and search incident to arrest rendered marijuana admissible | Levy argued arrest resulted from illegal inventory search, so subsequent search and seizure of marijuana was tainted | Marijuana inadmissible as fruit of the unlawful inventory search/arrest |
Key Cases Cited
- Wilford v. State, 50 N.E.3d 371 (Ind. 2016) (inventory-search exception applies only when impoundment and inventory are reasonable; State must show impoundment adhered to departmental routine)
- Fair v. State, 627 N.E.2d 427 (Ind. 1993) (two-prong standard for impoundment: threat of harm and adherence to departmental routine)
- Kelly v. State, 997 N.E.2d 1045 (Ind. 2013) (constitutional challenges to searches reviewed de novo)
- Weathers v. State, 61 N.E.3d 279 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016) (distinguishable where defendant did not challenge decision to impound)