Court Opinion

ID: 9744509
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 22:04:53.250103+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:49.758056
License: Public Domain

RILEY, Judge,
concurs in result.
I concur in result. The majority opinion recognizes that in the case of Jefferson v. State, 780 N.E.2d 398, 400 (Ind.Ct.App.2002), a factually similar case was decided by Judges Robb, Mattingly-May, and myself in a different manner. The distinguishing difference, however, was that in this case, the police officers did have knowledge of an outstanding warrant for the arrest of Quinn prior to the stop of the vehicle. The stop was reasonable based upon the knowledge of the police officers that an outstanding arrest warrant needed to be served upon Quinn.
In Jefferson, however, the stop was not based upon a reasonable suspicion. After the illegal stop, it was discovered that Jefferson had an outstanding warrant for operating a motor vehicle without a driver’s license. The detention prior to her arrest was not constitutionally permissible.