Title: Ralph Belvedere v. State of Indiana
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 48S05-0806-CR-370
State: Indiana
Issuer: Indiana Supreme Court
Date: June 27, 2008

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT 
 
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE 
Christopher A. Cage 
 
 
 
 
 
Steve Carter 
Anderson, Indiana 
 
 
 
 
 
Attorney General of Indiana 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
J.T. Whitehead 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Deputy Attorney General 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Indianapolis, Indiana 
______________________________________________________________________________ 
 
In the 
Indiana Supreme Court  
_________________________________ 
 
No. 48S05-0806-CR-370 
 
RALPH BELVEDERE,  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Appellant (Defendant below), 
 
v. 
 
STATE OF INDIANA, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Appellee (Plaintiff below). 
_________________________________ 
 
Appeal from the Madison Superior Court, No. 48D03-0406-FC-00303 
The Honorable Thomas Newman, Jr., Judge 
_________________________________ 
 
On Petition to Transfer from the Indiana Court of Appeals, No. 48A05-0611-CR-669 
_________________________________ 
 
June 27, 2008 
Boehm, Justice. 
 
On May 17, 2002, Madison County Drug Task Force’s Detective Kevin Earley received a 
tip from a confidential source about a white man “by the name of Ralph” who lived at a specified 
address.  The source took Earley to the address and said that he had “been in the house 
approximately two days before” where he had seen “two pounds of marijuana.”  The informant 
also said that “within the last few months” he had seen “up to ten pounds of marijuana” in an 
apartment behind the house that was also owned by “Ralph.”  Earley ran a license check on the 
truck parked in the driveway and learned from the Anderson City utilities that the owner of the 
FILED
CLERK
of the supreme court,
court of appeals and
tax court
Jun 27 2008, 1:07 pm
property was Ralph Belvedere.  Earley placed surveillance on the house.  On May 19, Earley 
seized a trash bag set out in the alley behind Belvedere’s apartment.  In the trash, he discovered 
seeds, stems, and material which were later confirmed to be from marijuana plants.  Based on 
this evidence, Earley obtained a search warrant, and seized over ten pounds of marijuana. 
 
On June 10, 2004, Belvedere was charged with Class C felony possession with intent to 
deal marijuana and Class D felony maintaining a common nuisance.  On March 23, 2005, we 
decided Litchfield v. State, 824 N.E.2d 356 (Ind. 2005).  On October 14, 2005, Belvedere moved 
to suppress the evidence from the trash pull, citing Litchfield.  The trial court denied the motion 
to suppress, but the Court of Appeals reversed.  Belvedere v. State, 875 N.E.2d 352 (Ind. Ct. 
App. 2007).  The Court of Appeals held that Litchfield governed this search, the search was 
unconstitutional under Litchfield, and neither the statutory nor constitutional good faith 
exceptions applied.  Id. at 357, 362-63.  We grant transfer concurrent with this opinion. 
We review de novo a trial court’s ruling on the constitutionality of a search or seizure.  
Myers v. State, 839 N.E.2d 1146, 1150 (Ind. 2005).  However, we give deference to a trial 
court’s determination of the facts, which will not be overturned unless clearly erroneous.  Id.  
Thus, we do not reweigh the evidence, but consider conflicting evidence most favorably to the 
trial court’s ruling.  State v. Quirk, 842 N.E.2d 334, 340 (Ind. 2006). 
 
For the reasons explained in Membres v. State, No. 49S02-0701-CR-33, ___ N.E.2d ___, 
slip op. at 11 (Ind. June 27, 2008), also decided today, “challenges to pre-Litchfield searches that 
did not raise Litchfield-like claims in the trial court before Litchfield was decided are governed 
by pre-Litchfield doctrine.”  Because Belvedere’s challenge to this pre-Litchfield search was first 
raised after Litchfield was decided, Litchfield is not available to him in this appeal. 
 
This trash search is governed by the law as articulated in Moran v. State, 644 N.E.2d 536 
(Ind. 1994), which looked to the totality of the circumstances to evaluate the reasonableness of a 
search and seizure.  In Moran, we upheld a search and seizure of garbage left in front of the 
defendant’s house, noting that the police conducted themselves as trash collectors, did not 
disturb Moran or his neighbors, and did not trespass.  Id. at 541.  Similarly, in Lovell v. State, 
813 N.E.2d 393, 398 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004), the Court of Appeals upheld a trash search under 
 
2
Moran where the trash bags were next to the mailbox, other people had trash out, and there was 
no indication of trespass or disturbance of the neighbors. 
In this case, a confidential informant told Detective Earley about the presence of drugs, 
gave a name and description of Belvedere, and took him past Belvedere’s house.  Earley verified 
Belvedere’s identity by running a license check on the parked vehicle and checking utility 
records.  Earley testified that the trash was sitting out in an alley, presumably to be collected, and 
there is no argument that Earley failed to retrieve the trash in the same manner as a trash 
collector, bothered any neighbors, or trespassed.  Thus, the trash search was reasonable under the 
law at the time of the search. 
Conclusion 
The trial court’s denial of the motion to suppress the evidence of the trash search is 
affirmed. 
Shepard, C.J., and Dickson, J., concur. 
Sullivan, J., dissents, for the reasons set forth in his dissenting opinion today in Membres 
v. State, No. 49S02-0701-CR-33 (Ind. June 27, 2008) (Sullivan, J., dissenting).   
Rucker, J., dissents with separate opinion. 
 
3
 
1
Rucker, Justice dissenting. 
 
I respectfully dissent.  For reasons expressed in my separate opinion in Membres v. State, 
No. 49S02-0701-CR-33, ___ N.E.2d ___, ___ (Ind. June 27, 2008) (Rucker, J., dissenting), I 
would apply Litchfield retroactively to this case.  In so doing I agree with the Court of Appeals 
that the search of Belvedere’s trash was unconstitutional and no statutory or constitutional good 
faith exceptions apply. See Belvedere v. State, 875 N.E.2d 352 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).