Legal Opinion

State v. Tindell

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided January 30, 1980No. 1178S251PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GIVAN, Chief Justice.

The trial judge correctly treated a motion to dismiss as a motion to suppress evidence and sustained said motion. The State appeals. We reverse the trial court.

The record shows the following: After stopping a pickup truck displaying a paper registration in the back window and an expired license plate, a police officer learned that the vehicle had just been purchased from the appellee’s business, Tin-dell’s Auto Sales. The certificate of title was not notarized nor did it bear the name of a purchaser. The officer went to Tin-dell’s Auto Sales, where he advised the salesman…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San FranciscoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Marshall v. Barlow's, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. Almeida-Sanchez v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  4. See v. City of SeattleSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  5. United States v. BiswellSupreme Court of the United States · 1972

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. New York v. BurgerSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  2. Illinois v. KrullSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  3. State v. BlakeIndiana Court of Appeals · 1984
  4. State v. PeaseIndiana Court of Appeals · 1988
  5. Pueblo v. Ferreira MoralesSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1998

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API