Terrence J. Fuqua v. State of Indiana
2013 Ind. App. LEXIS 142
Ind. Ct. App.2013Background
- Fuqua was convicted in Allen Superior Court of multiple offenses related to cocaine and marijuana trafficking, possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon, and paraphernalia; he challenges the trash-search and warrant-based searches as to suppression.
- Detectives linked Fuqua to cocaine dealing via interviews with McCarter and Stovall, and an anonymous tip regarding cash and a hidden money compartment at Fuqua’s residence; Holman was identified as a cocaine dealer in the same investigation.
- A trash pull from Fuqua’s residence produced crack pipes, baking soda boxes, and bags with cocaine residue, providing the basis for surveillance and further investigation.
- Detectives obtained a search warrant for Fuqua’s residence on November 22, 2011, leading to seizures of cocaine, marijuana, scales, cash, paraphernalia, and a firearm.
- Fuqua moved to suppress the trash-search evidence and challenged the probable-cause basis for the warrant; the trial court denied suppression and Fuqua was convicted at a bench trial.
- The appellate court affirmed, holding that the trash search was reasonable under Indiana law and the warrant was supported by probable cause, based on corroboration of informants and surveillance evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was reasonable suspicion to search Fuqua’s trash | Fuqua argues informants were not credible and tips were uncorroborated | Detectives relied on totality of circumstances including corroboration | Yes, reasonable suspicion existed |
| Whether the warrant was supported by probable cause | Anonymous tips and informants’ hearsay lacked credibility | Totality of corroborating evidence supported probable cause | Yes, probable cause supported the warrant |
Key Cases Cited
- Litchfield v. State, 824 N.E.2d 356 (Ind. 2005) (trash searches require articulable basis of suspicion under totality)
- Holder v. State, 847 N.E.2d 930 (Ind. 2006) (Article I, Section 11 may provide greater protection than the Fourth Amendment)
- Wells v. State, 904 N.E.2d 265 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (risk of reliance on hunches; suppression reviewed de novo)
- Gates v. Illinois, 462 U.S. 213 (U.S. 1983) (anonymous tips require corroboration or reliability; totality of circumstances)
- Spillers v. State, 847 N.E.2d 949 (Ind. 2006) (trustworthiness of hearsay depends on indicia of reliability or corroboration)
- Jaggers v. State, 687 N.E.2d 180 (Ind. 1997) (anonymous tips require corroboration for probable cause)
- Casady v. State, 934 N.E.2d 1181 (Ind. 2010) (probable cause based on sending reasonable probability of evidence at location)
- Helsley v. State, 809 N.E.2d 292 (Ind. 2004) (probable cause standard for search)