Shaquille Washington v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.), 49A05-1610-CR-2400

A string of armed robberies targeted patrons of PLS Check Cashing; investigators identified a silver Lexus as a suspect vehicle and obtained a GPS warrant to track it.
From March 7–25, 2016, the Lexus repeatedly visited the PLS parking lot; on March 25 undercover officers surveilled the vehicle.
The Lexus followed victim Fatoumeh Bah from the PLS lot to a restaurant parking lot where Detective Haynes observed a male holding Bah at gunpoint; Bah reported her purse and cash stolen.
Officers conducted a felony stop of the Lexus; driver Brian Artis and passenger Shaquille Washington were arrested; $280 was found on Washington and $143 in the console, and Bah’s credit card was on the passenger-side floorboard.
Washington moved to suppress the warrantless search but the trial court denied the motion; he did not object at trial to admission of the seized currency, was convicted of Level 3 armed robbery, and appealed claiming Fourth Amendment error.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether admission of evidence from warrantless search violated the Fourth Amendment	State: search was incident to a valid arrest because officers had probable cause to arrest occupants of a suspect vehicle	Washington: officers lacked probable cause to arrest him; search was unlawful and evidence should be suppressed	Admission upheld: officers had probable cause based on surveillance, observed armed robbery, and GPS intelligence; search was incident to lawful arrest
Whether failure to contemporaneously object at trial waives suppression claim	State: failing to object at trial waives the issue absent fundamental error	Washington: pretrial motion to suppress should preserve the claim; contemporaneous objection would have been futile	Waiver applies: defendant’s failure to object at trial forfeited review except for fundamental error, which was not shown

Clark v. State, 994 N.E.2d 252 (Ind. 2013) (denial of motion to suppress not reviewable on direct appeal after trial except via evidentiary admission challenge)
Cochran v. State, 843 N.E.2d 980 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (related rule on suppress motions and appeals)
Brown v. State, 929 N.E.2d 204 (Ind. 2010) (need for contemporaneous objection at trial to preserve evidentiary issues)
Absher v. State, 866 N.E.2d 350 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (fundamental error exception to waiver is narrow)
Benson v. State, 762 N.E.2d 748 (Ind. 2002) (definition and limits of fundamental error)
Wilkinson v. State, 70 N.E.3d 392 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017) (warrantless searches presumptively unreasonable; search-incident-to-arrest exception explained)
White v. State, 24 N.E.3d 535 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (probable cause standard described as practical and commonsense)
Jellison v. State, 656 N.E.2d 532 (Ind. Ct. App. 1995) (probable cause requires fair probability, less than proof beyond reasonable doubt)
Wyoming v. Houghton, 526 U.S. 295 (1999) (passengers may be expected to conceal evidence of wrongdoing; supports vehicle-search principles)
Clausen v. State, 622 N.E.2d 925 (Ind. 1993) (discusses contemporaneous objection rule; contains a notable dissent criticizing strict application)
Baker v. State, 425 N.E.2d 98 (Ind. 1981) (pretrial rulings on suppression do not relieve need for trial objection to preserve admissibility challenge)