IN: If product of illegal entry after knock-and-talk is removed from SW affidavit, PC still remained

Enduring surveillance of a duplex led to a knock-and-talk, and the officer was met with the overpowering smell of marijuana when the door was opened. Marijuana in plain view was seen on a table because the officer entered. Even redacting that from the affidavit for the search warrant, probable cause existed, and the motion to suppress was properly denied. Johnson v. State, 2015 Ind. App. LEXIS 409 (May 20, 2015).

The trial court erred by granting defendant’s motion to suppress because it failed to make factual findings supporting its conclusion that the continued detention was illegal. While the trial court found that the police lacked reasonable suspicion to further detain defendant, it did not find that the police had issued a citation or warning or that the police exceeded the time necessary to do so. Even assuming the trial court concluded that the furtive movements and surrounding circumstances did not supply sufficient reasonable suspicion to support the search at issue, there remained the issue of whether defendant consented to the search of the vehicle. The trial court acknowledged that there was disagreement as to whether defendant agreed to a search of his vehicle, which required a credibility determination. Reversed for further proceedings. State v. Prince, 2015-Ohio-1923, 2015 Ohio App. LEXIS 1844 (9th Dist. May 20, 2015).*