Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
A man convicted of dealing methamphetamine and two other felonies lacked the legal standing to challenge the arrest of a witness who provided evidence of his crimes, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled Monday in affirming a lower court’s decision.
Jose Zuniga was convicted of dealing in methamphetamine, a Level 2 felony; possession of a narcotic drug, a Level 5 felony; and unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon, a Level 4 felony, based on evidence obtained from a search of his house.
A search warrant was issued based on information that law enforcement obtained during the separate arrest of a third party, Louise Antonio Lopez-Aleman.
According to court records, in August 2021, law enforcement officers were conducting surveillance outside of a house at 108 West Linden Avenue in Logansport in an attempt to locate an individual and execute an arrest warrant.
Police executed a traffic stop of a vehicle that committed two traffic infractions in the area. The vehicle had two occupants; Lopez-Aleman was the driver, and Anjelica Kassa was the passenger.
Lopez-Aleman provided police with “a Mexic[an], either ID card or driver’s license,” but he was unable to provide an Indiana driver’s license.
A police detective then asked Lopez-Aleman to step outside of the vehicle and conducted a pat-down search of Lopez-Aleman’s person.
Police discovered a vial containing suspected illegal drugs and arrested Lopez-Aleman. In a search incident to arrest, police discovered additional suspected drugs, firearms and $3500 in cash in the vehicle.
The passenger, Kassa, reported that she had just sold one pound of marijuana at the 225 West Linden Avenue address to Zuniga, whom she knew by another name. She showed police pictures and text messages identifying Zuniga.
Based on this information, law enforcement sought a search warrant to search the 225 West Linden Avenue address that same evening.
Inside the house, the officers discovered various illegal drugs, a scale, cash, baggies and an Uzi submachine gun, and they arrested Zuniga.
Zuniga filed a motion to suppress the evidence found in the house on the grounds that the search warrant was not supported by probable cause.
He argued that the search warrant lacked probable cause because it was obtained based on the information provided by Kassa during Lopez-Aleman’s arrest, but law enforcement had not done “anything to corroborate Ms. [K]assa’s hearsay statement” before applying for the search warrant.
A jury trial was held in Cass Superior Court in October 2023. Zuniga renewed his objection to the evidence based on his motion to suppress, and the trial court overruled this objection. The jury found Zuniga guilty as charged.
The trial court sentenced Zuniga to an aggregate sentence of 28 years in the Indiana Department of Correction
Zuniga appealed and argued that the trial court should have excluded the evidence because Lopez-Aleman’s arrest was, according to Zuniga, illegal.
In its opinion, the appellate court ruled Lopez-Aleman’s arrest did not support exclusion of the evidence against Zuniga under either the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution or Article 1, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution.
“Lopez-Aleman’s arrest does not implicate Zuniga’s personal rights, and Zuniga cannot vicariously assert the rights of Lopez-Aleman in order to suppress the evidence against Zuniga,” Judge Elizabeth Tavitas wrote for the court.
The case is Jose Miguel Zuniga v. State of Indiana, 23A-CR-3107.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.