Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Lawrence Gyamfi v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided September 4, 2014No. 30A01-1311-CR-487Published

1ConcurrenceBradford, Judge

I concur with the majority that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting the challenged evidence, i.e., the security tape from the Speedway store located in Greenfield, at trial. However, I write separately to reiterate that I believe that the inevitable discovery rule could apply under both the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution if the State were to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that the challenged evidence would have been discovered but for the unlawful search. The State, however, failed to do…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Nix v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Kevin M. Clark v. State of IndianaIndiana Supreme Court · 2013
  3. LaMunion v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2000

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API