search warrant requirement in Indiana

22 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1968–2020 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Indiana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (10)

Case	Followed	Cited
Harless v. Stategreen indctapp · 1991 · cited in 2 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2002–2004 2 sentences 2004Exceptions to the Fourth Amendment's search warrant requirement before lawful entry "include risk of bodily harm or 1236 death, aiding a person in need of assistance, protecting private property, or actual or imminent destruction or removal of evidence before a search warrant may be obtained." Harless v. State, 577 N.E.2d 245, 248 (Ind.Ct.App.1991). 2002*Exceptions to the Fourth Amendment's search warrant requirement before lawful entry "include risk of bodily harm or death, aiding a person in need of assistance, protecting private property, or actual or imminent destruction or removal of evidence before a search warrant may be obtained." Harless v. State, 577 N.E.2d 245, 248 (Ind.Ct.App.1991) (citing Sayre v. State, 471 N.E.2d 708, 714 (Ind. Ct.App.1984), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1027 , 106 S.Ct. 1226 , 89 L.Ed.2d 386 ).	2	2
Pollard v. Stategreen ind · 1979 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019 2 sentences 2019The 7 See Pollard v. State, 270 Ind. 599, 607 , 388 N.E.2d 496, 503 (1979) (holding under circumstances of case not involving separation or divorce, husband has legitimate expectation of privacy in vehicle titled to spouse). 2019The 7 See Pollard v. State, 270 Ind. 599, 607 , 388 N.E.2d 496, 503 (1979) (holding under circumstances of case not involving separation or divorce, husband has legitimate expectation of privacy in vehicle titled to spouse).	1	1
Justice v. Stategreen indctapp · 2002 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019 2 sentences 2019The open view doctrine, not to be confused with the plain view doctrine, “is used in situations in which a law enforcement officer sees contraband from an area that is not constitutionally protected, but rather is in a place where the officer is lawfully entitled to be.” Justice v. State, 765 N.E.2d 161, 165 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002), clarified on reh’g, 767 N.E.2d 995 . 10 “In such situations, anything that is within ‘open view’ may be observed without having to obtain a search warrant because making such ‘open view’ 10 “The plain view doctrine is recognized as an exception to the search warrant r 2019The open view doctrine, not to be confused with the plain view doctrine, “is used in situations in which a law enforcement officer sees contraband from an area that is not constitutionally protected, but rather is in a place where the officer is lawfully entitled to be.” Justice v. State, 765 N.E.2d 161, 165 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002), clarified on reh’g, 767 N.E.2d 995 . 10 “In such situations, anything that is within ‘open view’ may be observed without having to obtain a search warrant because making such ‘open view’ 10 “The plain view doctrine is recognized as an exception to the search warrant r	1	1
Collins v. Stategreen indctapp · 2005 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014 1 sentence 2014Therefore, the issue is “appropriately framed as whether the trial court abused its discretion by admitting the evidence at trial.” Collins v. State, 822 N.E.2d 214, 218 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005), trans. denied.	1	1
Smith v. Stategreen indctapp · 1999 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010 1 sentence 2010One exception to the search warrant requirement occurs when consent is given to the search, under the theory that "when an individual gives permission to a search of either his person or property, governmental intrusion thereon is presumably not unreasonable." Smith v. State, 713 N.E.2d 338, 342 (Ind.Ct.App.1999), trans. denied. (citing Jones v. State, 655 N.E.2d 49, 54 (Ind.1995).	1	1
Jones v. Stategreen ind · 1995 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010 1 sentence 2010One exception to the search warrant requirement occurs when consent is given to the search, under the theory that "when an individual gives permission to a search of either his person or property, governmental intrusion thereon is presumably not unreasonable." Smith v. State, 713 N.E.2d 338, 342 (Ind.Ct.App.1999), trans. denied. (citing Jones v. State, 655 N.E.2d 49, 54 (Ind.1995).	1	1
Litchfield v. Stategreen ind · 2005 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010 1 sentence 2010Litchfield v. State, 824 N.E.2d 356, 358 (Ind.2005).	1	1
Sayre v. Stategreen indctapp · 1984 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2002–2002 1 sentence 2002Exceptions to the Fourth Amendment's search warrant requirement before lawful entry "include risk of bodily harm or death, aiding a person in need of assistance, protecting private property, or actual or imminent destruction or removal of evidence before a search warrant may be obtained." Harless v. State, 577 N.E.2d 245, 248 (Ind.Ct.App.1991) (citing Sayre v. State, 471 N.E.2d 708, 714 (Ind. Ct.App.1984), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1027 , 106 S.Ct. 1226 , 89 L.Ed.2d 386 ).	1	1
CDT v. Stategreen indctapp · 1995 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 1996–1996 1 sentence 1996CD.T. v. State, 653 N.E.2d 1041, 1044 (Ind.Ct.App.1995).	1	1
Hill v. Stategreen ind · 1978 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 1996–1996 2 sentences 1996“The consent to search is a valid exception to the search warrant requirement under Indiana law.” Hill v. State, 267 Ind. 480, 487 , 371 N.E.2d 1303, 1307 (Ind.1978). 1996“The consent to search is a valid exception to the search warrant requirement under Indiana law.” Hill v. State, 267 Ind. 480, 487 , 371 N.E.2d 1303, 1307 (Ind.1978).	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (20)

Case	Cited	Years
Mincey v. Arizona green scotus · 1978 2 sentences 2018He cites Mincey v. Arizona , 437 U.S. 385 , 394, 98 S.Ct. 2408 , 57 L.Ed.2d 290 (1978), in which the United States Supreme Court held that there was no "murder scene exception" to the Fourth Amendment's search warrant requirement. 2018He cites Mincey v. Arizona , 437 U.S. 385 , 394, 98 S.Ct. 2408 , 57 L.Ed.2d 290 (1978), in which the United States Supreme Court held that there was no "murder scene exception" to the Fourth Amendment's search warrant requirement.	2	1983–2018
Harper v. State green indctapp · 2010 2 sentences 2012Harper, 922 N.E.2d at 81 . 2012Harper, 922 N.E.2d at 81 .	2	2012–2012
Chambers v. Maroney green scotus · 1970 2 sentences 2001Thus, the automobile exception to the search warrant rule requires more than probable cause, because "[olnly in exigent circumstances will the judgment of the police as to probable cause serve as a sufficient authorization for a search." Chambers, 399 U.S. at 51 , 90 S.Ct. at 1981 . 2001Thus, the automobile exception to the search warrant rule requires more than probable cause, because "[olnly in exigent circumstances will the judgment of the police as to probable cause serve as a sufficient authorization for a search." Chambers, 399 U.S. at 51 , 90 S.Ct. at 1981 .	2	1997–2001
Hannibal v. State green indctapp · 2004 1 sentence 2020“To justify a warrantless seizure under the plain view doctrine, a law enforcement officer (1) must not have violated the Fourth Amendment in arriving at the place where the items are in plain view, (2) the incriminating nature of the objects in plain view must be immediately apparent, and (3) the officer must have a lawful right to access the items in plain view.” Hannibal, 804 N.E.2d at 210 . [22] The record reveals that, at the suppression hearing, Trooper Walters testified he observed a glass smoking pipe and two digital scales in plain view during the protective sweep of Saylor’s residenc	1	2020–2020
Justice v. State green indctapp · 2002 1 sentence 2019The open view doctrine, not to be confused with the plain view doctrine, “is used in situations in which a law enforcement officer sees contraband from an area that is not constitutionally protected, but rather is in a place where the officer is lawfully entitled to be.” Justice v. State, 765 N.E.2d 161, 165 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002), clarified on reh’g, 767 N.E.2d 995 . 10 “In such situations, anything that is within ‘open view’ may be observed without having to obtain a search warrant because making such ‘open view’ 10 “The plain view doctrine is recognized as an exception to the search warrant r	1	2019–2019
Harper v. State green indctapp · 2012 1 sentence 2015We concluded however, that the law of the case Court of Appeals of Indiana \| Memorandum Decision 10A05-1407-PC-343 \| September 18, 2015 Page 6 of 13 doctrine applied because we had previously found that an exception to the search warrant requirement arose when both Porch and Harper verbally consented to a search of the purse.2 Id. at 658 .	1	2015–2015
Sanderson v. Rice green scotus · 1986 1 sentence 2002Exceptions to the Fourth Amendment's search warrant requirement before lawful entry "include risk of bodily harm or death, aiding a person in need of assistance, protecting private property, or actual or imminent destruction or removal of evidence before a search warrant may be obtained." Harless v. State, 577 N.E.2d 245, 248 (Ind.Ct.App.1991) (citing Sayre v. State, 471 N.E.2d 708, 714 (Ind. Ct.App.1984), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1027 , 106 S.Ct. 1226 , 89 L.Ed.2d 386 ).	1	2002–2002
Melvin v. Oklahoma green scotus · 1986 1 sentence 2002Exceptions to the Fourth Amendment's search warrant requirement before lawful entry "include risk of bodily harm or death, aiding a person in need of assistance, protecting private property, or actual or imminent destruction or removal of evidence before a search warrant may be obtained." Harless v. State, 577 N.E.2d 245, 248 (Ind.Ct.App.1991) (citing Sayre v. State, 471 N.E.2d 708, 714 (Ind. Ct.App.1984), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1027 , 106 S.Ct. 1226 , 89 L.Ed.2d 386 ).	1	2002–2002
Moody v. State green ind · 1983 1 sentence 1990Moody v. State (1983), Ind., 448 N.E.2d 660, 663 .	1	1990–1990
Stallings v. State green ind · 1987 1 sentence 1989Stallings v. State (1987), Ind., 508 N.E.2d 550 .	1	1989–1989
Bruce v. State green ind · 1978 2 sentences 1983Mincey v. Arizona, (1978) 437 U.S. 385 , 98 S.Ct. 2408 , 57 L.Ed.2d 290 ; Michigan v. Tyler, (1978) 436 U.S. 499 , 98 S.Ct. 1942 , 56 L.Ed.2d 486 ; Bruce v. State, (1978) 268 Ind. 180 , 375 N.E.2d 1042 , cert. denied 439 U.S. 988 , 99 S.Ct. 586 , 58 L.Ed.2d 662 ; Maxey v. State, (1969) 251 Ind. 645 , 244 N.E.2d 650 , cert. denied 397 U.S. 949 , 90 S.Ct. 969 , 25 L.Ed.2d 130 . 1983Mincey v. Arizona, (1978) 437 U.S. 385 , 98 S.Ct. 2408 , 57 L.Ed.2d 290 ; Michigan v. Tyler, (1978) 436 U.S. 499 , 98 S.Ct. 1942 , 56 L.Ed.2d 486 ; Bruce v. State, (1978) 268 Ind. 180 , 375 N.E.2d 1042 , cert. denied 439 U.S. 988 , 99 S.Ct. 586 , 58 L.Ed.2d 662 ; Maxey v. State, (1969) 251 Ind. 645 , 244 N.E.2d 650 , cert. denied 397 U.S. 949 , 90 S.Ct. 969 , 25 L.Ed.2d 130 .	1	1983–1983
Maxey v. State green ind · 1969 2 sentences 1983Mincey v. Arizona, (1978) 437 U.S. 385 , 98 S.Ct. 2408 , 57 L.Ed.2d 290 ; Michigan v. Tyler, (1978) 436 U.S. 499 , 98 S.Ct. 1942 , 56 L.Ed.2d 486 ; Bruce v. State, (1978) 268 Ind. 180 , 375 N.E.2d 1042 , cert. denied 439 U.S. 988 , 99 S.Ct. 586 , 58 L.Ed.2d 662 ; Maxey v. State, (1969) 251 Ind. 645 , 244 N.E.2d 650 , cert. denied 397 U.S. 949 , 90 S.Ct. 969 , 25 L.Ed.2d 130 . 1983Mincey v. Arizona, (1978) 437 U.S. 385 , 98 S.Ct. 2408 , 57 L.Ed.2d 290 ; Michigan v. Tyler, (1978) 436 U.S. 499 , 98 S.Ct. 1942 , 56 L.Ed.2d 486 ; Bruce v. State, (1978) 268 Ind. 180 , 375 N.E.2d 1042 , cert. denied 439 U.S. 988 , 99 S.Ct. 586 , 58 L.Ed.2d 662 ; Maxey v. State, (1969) 251 Ind. 645 , 244 N.E.2d 650 , cert. denied 397 U.S. 949 , 90 S.Ct. 969 , 25 L.Ed.2d 130 .	1	1983–1983
Michigan v. Tyler green scotus · 1978 2 sentences 1983Mincey v. Arizona, (1978) 437 U.S. 385 , 98 S.Ct. 2408 , 57 L.Ed.2d 290 ; Michigan v. Tyler, (1978) 436 U.S. 499 , 98 S.Ct. 1942 , 56 L.Ed.2d 486 ; Bruce v. State, (1978) 268 Ind. 180 , 375 N.E.2d 1042 , cert. denied 439 U.S. 988 , 99 S.Ct. 586 , 58 L.Ed.2d 662 ; Maxey v. State, (1969) 251 Ind. 645 , 244 N.E.2d 650 , cert. denied 397 U.S. 949 , 90 S.Ct. 969 , 25 L.Ed.2d 130 . 1983Mincey v. Arizona, (1978) 437 U.S. 385 , 98 S.Ct. 2408 , 57 L.Ed.2d 290 ; Michigan v. Tyler, (1978) 436 U.S. 499 , 98 S.Ct. 1942 , 56 L.Ed.2d 486 ; Bruce v. State, (1978) 268 Ind. 180 , 375 N.E.2d 1042 , cert. denied 439 U.S. 988 , 99 S.Ct. 586 , 58 L.Ed.2d 662 ; Maxey v. State, (1969) 251 Ind. 645 , 244 N.E.2d 650 , cert. denied 397 U.S. 949 , 90 S.Ct. 969 , 25 L.Ed.2d 130 .	1	1983–1983
Maxey v. Indiana green scotus · 1970 1 sentence 1983Mincey v. Arizona, (1978) 437 U.S. 385 , 98 S.Ct. 2408 , 57 L.Ed.2d 290 ; Michigan v. Tyler, (1978) 436 U.S. 499 , 98 S.Ct. 1942 , 56 L.Ed.2d 486 ; Bruce v. State, (1978) 268 Ind. 180 , 375 N.E.2d 1042 , cert. denied 439 U.S. 988 , 99 S.Ct. 586 , 58 L.Ed.2d 662 ; Maxey v. State, (1969) 251 Ind. 645 , 244 N.E.2d 650 , cert. denied 397 U.S. 949 , 90 S.Ct. 969 , 25 L.Ed.2d 130 .	1	1983–1983
Collins v. United States green scotus · 1978 1 sentence 1983Mincey v. Arizona, (1978) 437 U.S. 385 , 98 S.Ct. 2408 , 57 L.Ed.2d 290 ; Michigan v. Tyler, (1978) 436 U.S. 499 , 98 S.Ct. 1942 , 56 L.Ed.2d 486 ; Bruce v. State, (1978) 268 Ind. 180 , 375 N.E.2d 1042 , cert. denied 439 U.S. 988 , 99 S.Ct. 586 , 58 L.Ed.2d 662 ; Maxey v. State, (1969) 251 Ind. 645 , 244 N.E.2d 650 , cert. denied 397 U.S. 949 , 90 S.Ct. 969 , 25 L.Ed.2d 130 .	1	1983–1983
Nicholas v. Tennessee Department of Employment Security green scotus · 1978 1 sentence 1983Mincey v. Arizona, (1978) 437 U.S. 385 , 98 S.Ct. 2408 , 57 L.Ed.2d 290 ; Michigan v. Tyler, (1978) 436 U.S. 499 , 98 S.Ct. 1942 , 56 L.Ed.2d 486 ; Bruce v. State, (1978) 268 Ind. 180 , 375 N.E.2d 1042 , cert. denied 439 U.S. 988 , 99 S.Ct. 586 , 58 L.Ed.2d 662 ; Maxey v. State, (1969) 251 Ind. 645 , 244 N.E.2d 650 , cert. denied 397 U.S. 949 , 90 S.Ct. 969 , 25 L.Ed.2d 130 .	1	1983–1983
McMahon v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation & Parole green scotus · 1978 1 sentence 1983Mincey v. Arizona, (1978) 437 U.S. 385 , 98 S.Ct. 2408 , 57 L.Ed.2d 290 ; Michigan v. Tyler, (1978) 436 U.S. 499 , 98 S.Ct. 1942 , 56 L.Ed.2d 486 ; Bruce v. State, (1978) 268 Ind. 180 , 375 N.E.2d 1042 , cert. denied 439 U.S. 988 , 99 S.Ct. 586 , 58 L.Ed.2d 662 ; Maxey v. State, (1969) 251 Ind. 645 , 244 N.E.2d 650 , cert. denied 397 U.S. 949 , 90 S.Ct. 969 , 25 L.Ed.2d 130 .	1	1983–1983
Sizemore v. State green indctapp · 1974 2 sentences 1978Sizemore v. State (1974), 159 Ind.App. 549 , 308 N.E.2d 400 . 1978Sizemore v. State (1974), 159 Ind.App. 549 , 308 N.E.2d 400 .	1	1978–1978
Muegel v. State green ind · 1971 2 sentences 1978Muegel v. State, (1971) 257 Ind. 146 , 272 N.E.2d 617 . 1978Muegel v. State, (1971) 257 Ind. 146 , 272 N.E.2d 617 .	1	1978–1978
District of Columbia v. Little green cadc · 1950 2 sentences 1968To view the Amendment as a limitation upon an otherwise unlimited right to search is to invert completely the true posture of rights and the limitations thereon.” 178 F. 2d at 16 . 1968To view the Amendment as a limitation upon an otherwise unlimited right to search is to invert completely the true posture of rights and the limitations thereon." 178 F.2d at 16 .	1	1968–1968

Statutes the citing opinions construe

IN § Ind. Code § 35-48-4-1 (3) IN § Ind. Code § 35-48-4-13 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

OH 122 (1981–2026) PA 90 (1981–2025) LA 54 (1974–2019) KS 47 (1985–2022) MI 41 (1922–2022) CA 37 (1962–2026) NY 35 (1972–2025) WA 34 (1973–2018) TX 33 (1981–2021) IL 31 (1970–2024) FL 29 (1978–2024) TN 25 (1975–2024) NJ 23 (1979–2026) MA 23 (1971–2025) IN 22 (1968–2020) GA 20 (2003–2023) IA 16 (1969–2026) MN 16 (1987–2024) MT 15 (1980–2025) ND 15 (1981–2019) OR 14 (1968–2022) NE 13 (1978–2023) VA 12 (1993–2023) AL 12 (1976–2012) WI 12 (1978–2021) AK 10 (1972–1996) MD 9 (1971–2015) CT 9 (1976–2020) MO 9 (1974–2017) AZ 9 (1978–2015) CO 8 (1980–2024) SC 7 (1983–2019) HI 7 (1980–2020) DC 7 (1977–2016) NC 7 (1976–2009) ID 7 (1979–2017) WV 6 (1922–2015) WY 6 (1982–2016) DE 6 (1973–2025) SD 5 (2003–2015) RI 5 (1989–2007) AR 5 (1967–2014) UT 5 (1987–2016) NV 4 (1975–2013) OK 4 (1927–1992) NM 4 (1997–2013) KY 4 (1988–2021) ME 3 (1981–2017) NH 3 (1983–2017) VT 2 (1991–2012) MS 2 (2003–2019)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check