Remember videos with “no guns, knives, bombs” in the request for consent?

“The State argues that, even though the sock was no longer in Peele’s possession or control, Officer James could still reasonably have feared that the sock contained ‘an explosive or incendiary device.’ Appellee’s Brief at 30. However, there is no testimony suggesting that Officer James suspected or believed that Peele had secreted an explosive device in the sock placed in the waistband of his sweat pants. And, in any event, a mere suspicion or possibility would not justify a warrantless search.” Defendant was also handcuffed, and the court finds it highly unlikely he would have abandoned the sock simply because he couldn’t get to it. Peele v. State, 2019 Ind. App. LEXIS 360 (Aug. 15, 2019).