Skip to main content

Taylor v. State

Citations

  • 842 N.E.2d 327
  • 2006 Ind. LEXIS 128
  • 2006 WL 328816

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that “the factors leading to our conclusion that impounding [the defendant’s] car was not warranted by police administrative care-taking functions [under the Fourth Amendment analysis] support the conclusion that the requirements of the Indiana Constitution were violated as well”
  • concluding the impound was unreasonable in part because it was unclear that Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-1975 | May 29, 2019 Page 7 of 11 vehicle was parked illegally, and, in any event, vehicle was not a potential hazard to public safety
  • “Automobiles are among the ‘effects’ protected by Article 1, Section 11.”
  • “Automobiles are among the ‘effects’ protected by Article 1, Section 11.”
  • “The fact that [defendant] was unable to drive his car because his permit was suspended does not in this instance support a conclusion that the car itself was imperiled or constituted a potential hazard which [the police officer] reasonably believed he needed to address.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Rucker, Shepard, Dickson, Sullivan, Boehm

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

58 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

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.