Will Thomas v. State of Indiana
2017 Ind. LEXIS 659
| Ind. | 2017Background
- JEAN task force received a tip from a reliable confidential informant that two men from Chicago in a white minivan with a temporary Illinois plate would sell drugs at a Marion Comfort Suites.
- Officers surveilled and stopped the Dodge Caravan for an illegal lane change; Detective Stefanatos interviewed the passenger (Thomas) while Officer Martin spoke with the driver (Christmas).
- A certified narcotics canine alerted on the vehicle while occupants were inside; a subsequent interior search after occupants exited found nothing.
- Christmas consented to a strip search (nothing found on him); Thomas refused, so officers transported him to the police station to await a search warrant and placed him in a monitored interview room.
- While alone, Thomas was seen placing a small baggie in his mouth; officers forced his mouth open and recovered 8.5 grams of heroin. He was charged with Class A felony dealing.
- The trial court denied Thomas’s suppression motion; the Court of Appeals reversed (finding detention unlawful); the Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer and reinstated the conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Thomas) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was transporting and detaining Thomas at the station supported by probable cause under the Fourth Amendment? | Totality of circumstances (reliable CI, matching vehicle, nervous behavior, inconsistent stories, driver without ID, canine alert while occupants inside and loss of alert after exit) established probable cause to detain and arrest. | Canine alert to the vehicle does not, by itself, create probable cause to detain or arrest occupants; transporting Thomas to the station was an unlawful seizure and evidence should be suppressed. | Held: Probable cause existed under the totality of circumstances; transporting and detaining Thomas was lawful. Evidence recovered at station admissible. |
Key Cases Cited
- Maryland v. Pringle, 540 U.S. 366 (2003) (presence in vehicle with contraband can support arrest of occupants)
- Sears v. State, 668 N.E.2d 662 (Ind. 1996) (probable cause standard for warrantless arrest explained)
- State v. Hobbs, 933 N.E.2d 1281 (Ind. 2010) (dog sniffs of vehicles are not searches under the Fourth Amendment)
- Richard v. State, 7 N.E.3d 347 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (canine alert plus surrounding facts supported probable cause to search/detain occupants)