Legal Opinion

State v. Farber

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided March 26, 1997No. 82A05-9509-CR-372PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

RUCKER, Judge.

Appellee-Defendant Timothy R. Farber filed a motion to suppress the evidence which the trial court granted. In this interlocutory appeal the State challenges the trial court’s ruling. We address the following issues: 1) does the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine require the exclusion of evidence derived from conversations protected by the statutory spousal privilege; 2) was Farber’s confession given knowingly and voluntarily; and 3) did the trial court err in suppressing evidence recovered from the home of Far- ber’s acquaintance. We affirm in part and reverse in…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  3. Hoffa v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  4. Culombe v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  5. United States v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1971

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Gibson v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2000
  2. State v. FriedelIndiana Court of Appeals · 1999
  3. State v. EstepIndiana Court of Appeals · 2001
  4. Callahan v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1999
  5. State v. GlassIndiana Court of Appeals · 2002

22 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