Taylor v. State, 49A02-0809-CR-795
2nd Dist., 04-07-09, Ind.App. 904 N.E.2d 259
Attorney: Timothy Burns
Holding: Where Defendant agreed to speak with police officers in reference to an ongoing investigation after traffic stop for seatbelt violation had been completed, subsequent patdown was not justified. A vehicle, the contents of a vehicle, the driver of a vehicle, or a passenger in a vehicle may not be inspected, searched, or detained solely because of a violation of the Seatbelt Enforcement Act. I.C. 9-19-10-3.1 Also, where a person who is not under arrest agrees to be transported by an officer, the increased risk of danger to the officer of transporting an individual who might be armed provides sufficient justification for a pat down search of the person under the Indiana Constitution.
Here, Defendant was properly stopped for a seatbelt violation. During the stop, police discovered that a detective wanted to speak with the vehicle occupants about an ongoing investigation. After returning Defendant’s license and registration and telling Defendant he was “free to go,” officer asked Defendant whether he would be willing to go to the police station and speak with the detective about the ongoing investigation. As soon as Defendant agreed, officer did a pat down search for his safety when transporting Defendant and found marijuana. The search did not violate I.C. 9-19-10-3.1 because it was not performed solely because of the seatbelt violation, but rather for the officer’s safety. However, the search violated Article I, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution because Defendant never consented to being transported to the station. Thus, as soon as officer ordered Defendant to put hands on top of head and interlock fingers so officer could perform the pat down, Defendant was unlawfully detained without his consent. Defendant was not under arrest and could have driven himself to the police station to speak with detective. Thus, trial court abused its discretion by admitting marijuana seized from Defendant’s persons. Held, judgment reversed.
