Cochran v. State
Indiana Court of Appeals
1DissentRiley, Judge
I respectfully dissent from the majority's conclusion that the encounter between Marshal Adams and Cochran was consensual. Rather, I find that Cochran was seized for Fourth Amendment purposes without an objectively reasonable basis; consequently, I conclude that the information Marshal Adams gathered from Cochran during the seizure should have been suppressed.
The United States Supreme Court has acknowledged that the test for determining whether a seizure has occurred is "nee-essarily imprecise, because it is designed to assess the coercive effect of police conduct, taken as a whole, rather…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Florida v. BostickSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Michigan v. ChesternutSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Finger v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2003
- Sanchez v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2004
- Shirley v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2004
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.