Stark v. State
2012 Ind. App. LEXIS 36
Ind. Ct. App.2012Background
- Stark, in the car with three other occupants, appeared to slide something under his coat and later touched the coat while attempting to obtain his ID.
- Officer Shockey arrested Stark for public intoxication and possession of alcohol by a minor after observing alcohol in a cup and Stark's behavior.
- Shockey retrieved Stark's jacket from the vehicle during the arrest and found a loaded handgun inside the jacket.
- Stark moved to suppress the handgun as the search violated the Fourth Amendment and Article 1, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution; the trial court denied the motion, and the court certified the ruling for interlocutory appeal.
- The appellate court analyzed whether the jacket search was permissible as a search incident to arrest under Chimel and Belton, as clarified by Arizona v. Gant, considering Stark’s removal from the car and the presence of unsecured passengers.
- The court concluded the search was permissible under Gant due to officer-safety concerns and the presence of unrestrained passengers, and affirmed the denial of the motion to suppress.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the jacket search following Stark's arrest violated the Fourth Amendment or Indiana Constitution | Stark contends the search was unlawful under Gant and related authorities | State urges Gant justification due to officer safety and evidence concerns with unsecured passengers | Search permitted under Gant; no violation found |
Key Cases Cited
- Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332 (U.S. 2009) (limits vehicle searches incident to arrest to within-reach or evidence-belief tests)
- New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454 (U.S. 1981) (authorizes search of passenger compartment after lawful arrest in a vehicle)
- Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752 (U.S. 1969) (articulates the within-immediate-control search incident to arrest)
- Hobbs v. State, 933 N.E.2d 1281 (Ind. 2010) (Indiana test for reasonableness of searches under state constitution)
- Campos v. State, 885 N.E.2d 590 (Ind. 2008) (Indiana approach to suppression and reasonableness reviews)
- United States v. Davis, 569 F.3d 813 (8th Cir. 2009) (car passengers and officer-safety considerations in vehicle searches)
- United States v. Goodwin-Bey, 584 F.3d 1117 (8th Cir. 2009) (relation of Gant considerations to in-car searches with unsecured passengers)
- Commonwealth v. Young, 940 N.E.2d 885 (Mass. App. Ct. 2011) (unsecured passengers and necessity of search to preserve evidence)
- Salamasina, 615 F.3d 925 (8th Cir. 2010) (objective facts govern analysis of vehicle searches post-arrest)