{"id":39015,"date":"2019-08-10T00:00:04","date_gmt":"2019-08-10T05:00:04","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=39015"},"modified":"2019-08-09T15:51:17","modified_gmt":"2019-08-09T20:51:17","slug":"in-failure-to-prove-deptl-inventory-policy-fatal-to-inventory-search-officer-calling-search-one-thing-but-da-not-arguing-it-is-waiver","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=39015","title":{"rendered":"IN: Failure to prove dept&#8217;l inventory policy fatal to inventory search; officer calling search one thing but DA not arguing it is waiver"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The state didn\u2019t support the departmental inventory policy at trial, and that was error. Also, what the officer calls a search (here \u201csearch incident\u201d) the prosecutor didn\u2019t, and that argument was waived for appeal. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.in.gov\/judiciary\/opinions\/pdf\/08071901cb.pdf\">Smith v. State<\/a>, 2019 Ind. App. LEXIS 350 (Aug. 7, 2019):<br \/>\n<!--more--><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Officer Trotter&#8217;s testimony regarding impoundment is at best a generalized assertion that the impoundment and search were conducted pursuant to the department&#8217;s procedure; however, it fails to specially describe how the impoundment decision adhered to the department&#8217;s procedure. Moreover, the State acknowledges that &#8220;there was not sufficient evidence of the [Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department] inventory policy admitted at trial.&#8221; Appellee Br. p. 14. Given the conclusory nature of Officer Trotter&#8217;s testimony and the State&#8217;s concession, we conclude that the trial court erroneously admitted the evidence obtained from the inventory search.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The state didn\u2019t support the departmental inventory policy at trial, and that was error. Also, what the officer calls a search (here \u201csearch incident\u201d) the prosecutor didn\u2019t, and that argument was waived for appeal. Smith v. State, 2019 Ind. App. &hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=39015\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[66,39],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-39015","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-burden-of-proof","category-inventory"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/39015","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=39015"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/39015\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":39016,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/39015\/revisions\/39016"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=39015"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=39015"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=39015"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}