Indiana Supreme Court denies transfer of appeal in case of prolonged traffic stop for drug search

  • Print
Listen to this story

Subscriber Benefit

As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
This audio file is brought to you by
0:00
0:00
Loading audio file, please wait.
  • 0.25
  • 0.50
  • 0.75
  • 1.00
  • 1.25
  • 1.50
  • 1.75
  • 2.00
(Photo courtesy of Indiana Supreme Court)

The Indiana Supreme Court denied the transfer of an appeal arguing an officer with the Avon Police Department unlawfully searched his vehicle for illegal drugs during a traffic stop.

On April 22, 2021, appellant Theodore Canonge, Jr.’s vehicle was searched after an officer reportedly pulled him over for an illegal lane change.

Court documents claimed the officer prolonged the traffic stop to wait for a K-9 unit to conduct a search of Canonge’s vehicle, but that the officer did not have reasonable evidence to warrant the search.

In January, the Supreme Court granted a petition seeking transfer after the Court of Appeals denied Canonge’s appeal to have evidence found in his vehicle suppressed because the vehicle search violated his Fourth Amendment rights and rights under Article 1 Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution.

Supreme Court Justice Mark Massa and Christopher Goff concurred the denial.

Justice Derek Molter concurred but stated the defendant abandoned his state constitutional law claim on appeal.

“Yet, while Canonge argued in the trial court that the search violated Article 1, Section 11, and he cited Quirk in his appellate briefing, he never cited our state constitution on appeal and did not provide any analysis distinct from his Fourth Amendment analysis,” Molter said.

Chief Justice Loretta Rush dissented, stating the officer did not have reasonable proof to search the vehicle other than a “mere hunch” that criminal activity was happening. Rush said that denying the transfer means the Supreme Court approves an opinion that lowers the bar of what officers must prove to detain a motorist while waiting for a K-9 unit.

Justice Geoffrey Slaughter also dissented but said he would grant transfer because the appellate court didn’t have the “jurisdiction to decide this constitutional issue.”

The case is Theodore J. Canonge, Jr. v. State of Indiana, 24S-CR-00015.

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining
{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining Article limit resets on
{{ count_down }}