Indiana Court of Appeals· 9/8/2009
Powell v. State
Citations
- 912 N.E.2d 853
- 2009 Ind. App. LEXIS 1483
- 2009 WL 2869931
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding consensual encounter did not violate the defendant’s rights under Article 1, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution
- \Not every encounter between a police officer and a citizen amounts to a seizure requiring objective justification.\
- “When the small baggies containing marijuana in the vehicle became visible to the officers, seizure of the marijuana was proper pursuant to the ‘plain view doctrine.’”
- evidence sufficient to establish constructive possession of marijuana and methamphetamine where contraband was in plain view, close to Powell, and officer saw Powell repeatedly reach toward area where contraband was later found
- collecting federal and state cases
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Brown, Crone
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
19 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Woodson v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals· 2012-03-29· cited 31×
- Cody Rutledge v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals· 2015-03-19· cited 17×
- Aaron A. Negash v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals· 2018-12-11· cited 11×
- Kelly C. Mullen v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals· 2016-05-25· cited 8×
- Ashley Reid v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals· 2018-11-16· cited 5×
- Yanez v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals· 2012-02-21· cited 3×
- Gray v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals· 2011-03-08· cited 3×
- Lance E. Brown v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals· 2016-10-31· cited 2×
- Thomas Pinner v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals· 2016-08-24· cited 1×
- Marcus K. Baxter v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals· 2018-06-26· cited 1×
- Michael Woodson v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals· 2012-03-29
- Chad M. McLain v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals· 2012-03-16
- Herbert Yanez v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals· 2012-02-21
- Tianyve D. Stitts v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)Indiana Court of Appeals· 2015-06-15
- Deonte R. Hester v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)Indiana Court of Appeals· 2015-09-08
- Obed Bailey v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)Indiana Court of Appeals· 2016-04-28
- State of Indiana v. Deana Lane Gaddy (mem. dec.)Indiana Court of Appeals· 2018-05-24
- State of Indiana v. Dylan S. Woolston (mem. dec.)Indiana Court of Appeals· 2018-12-31
- Tony Lawrence Richey v. State of IndianaIndiana Court of Appeals· 2023-05-19
Cites
40 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Terry v. OhioSupreme Court· 1968-06-10· cited 37,942×
- Florida v. RoyerSupreme Court· 1983-03-23· cited 6,728×
- United States v. MendenhallSupreme Court· 1980-06-30· cited 6,313×
- California v. Hodari D.Supreme Court· 1991-04-23· cited 3,670×
- Michigan v. ChesternutSupreme Court· 1988-06-13· cited 1,499×
- Drane v. StateIndiana Supreme Court· 2007-05-29· cited 1,243×
- Jenkins v. StateIndiana Supreme Court· 2000-04-03· cited 241×
- State v. PullyTennessee Supreme Court· 1993-08-30· cited 241×
- Wilson v. StateIndiana Supreme Court· 2002-04-16· cited 204×
- Mitchell v. StateIndiana Supreme Court· 2001-04-16· cited 191×
- United States v. Derrick L. FosterSixth Circuit· 2004-07-20· cited 184×
- Holder v. StateIndiana Supreme Court· 2006-05-18· cited 164×
- United States v. Chong in KimNinth Circuit· 1994-06-01· cited 148×
- Lightbourne v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1983-09-15· cited 139×
- In Re the Welfare of E.D.J.Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1993-07-09· cited 126×
- Smith v. StateIndiana Supreme Court· 2001-09-10· cited 122×
- Overstreet v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals· 2000-02-29· cited 105×
- Goliday v. StateIndiana Supreme Court· 1999-03-19· cited 84×
- United States v. Roberto Encarnacion-GalvezFifth Circuit· 1992-06-17· cited 75×
- Sweed v. 73rd LegislativeSupreme Court· 1996-02-20· cited 74×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.