Litchfield v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that warrantless search of trash, which is permissible under the Fourth Amendment, requires a reasonable suspicion under the Article 1, Section 11
• holding that trash searches not based on individualized, reasonable suspicion were unreasonable under Article 1, Section 11 even though such searches had been held not to violate federal Fourth Amendment
• explaining that Indiana courts have explicitly rejected the expectation of privacy as a test of the reasonableness of a search or seizure under our constitution
• explaining that Indiana courts have explicitly rejected the expectation of privacy as a test of the reasonableness of a search or seizure under our constitution
• explaining that issue is whether search or seizure was “reasonable,” which turns on a balance of “1
• explaining that the federal guarantee focuses on one’s reasonable expectation of privacy and setting out a three-factor balancing test for assessing reasonableness under the Indiana Constitution

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).