Opinion ID: 1264881
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Legality of the Suarezes' Arrests

Text: The Suarezes next argue that their arrests were illegal because the police did not have probable cause to be in their home. Because we find that probable cause for the search warrant existed, this argument necessarily fails. This disposes of William's claim. Barbara Suarez also hints that probable cause did not exist to arrest her, even if it did exist to enter the home, because there was no evidence that she supplied the alcohol or encouraged anyone to drink. But, as the Indiana Court of Appeals has held, a homeowner's decision to permit minors to consume alcohol in her home is sufficient to violate Indiana's contributing to the delinquency of a minor statute. IND.CODE 35-46-1-8 (penalizing an adult who knowingly or intentionally encourages, aids, induces, or causes a person less than 18 years of age to commit an act of delinquency); Rush v. Indiana, 881 N.E.2d 46, 54 (Ind.Ct.App. 2008). Given that the police had reason to believe, as we've discussed, that minors were consuming alcohol at the Suarez home, and that Barbara Suarez was on the premises, surrounded by teenagers who were breathalyzed and arrested, and had not responded to the officers' request for entry, the undisputed facts show that there was probable cause for her arrest.