Frasier v. State
2003 WL 22010541, 2003 Ind. App. LEXIS 1563, 794 N.E.2d 449 (2003)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The good faith exception to the exclusionary rule allows the admission of evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant an officer reasonably believed to be valid, even if the warrant is later found to lack probable cause. Evidence of a separate crime discovered in plain view on a computer during the execution of such a warrant is also admissible, as an officer must necessarily open digital files to determine their contents.
Facts:
- A confidential source, CS#1, told police they had been inside Larry R. Frasier Jr.'s residence and saw marijuana, marijuana plants growing in the garage, and child pornography on his computer.
- A second source, CS#2, told police they had seen a 'bale of marijuana' in Frasier's garage several months prior.
- A third source, CS#3, stated they had been inside Frasier's home within 72 hours of speaking to police and had seen marijuana.
- A fourth source, CS#4, who was a neighbor, reported observing heavy traffic at Frasier's residence and noted that Frasier had recently obscured the windows on his garage.
- CS#4 also reported that Frasier had once tried to show CS#4's spouse pornographic pictures on his computer.
- Detective Scott Southerland conducted his own surveillance, confirming the garage windows were covered and observing black plastic planting pots behind the garage.
- Prior to seeking a warrant, Detective Southerland used a thermal imaging device on Frasier's garage, which revealed a heat pattern consistent with an indoor marijuana growing operation.
- A criminal history check revealed Frasier had a 1978 arrest for smuggling marijuana.
Procedural Posture:
- Detective Southerland prepared an affidavit and obtained a search warrant from the Brown County Circuit Court to search Larry Frasier Jr.'s residence for evidence related to marijuana.
- After executing the warrant, the State charged Frasier in the Brown County Circuit Court with Possession of Marijuana and Possession of Child Pornography.
- Frasier filed a motion to suppress the evidence seized from his home and computer, arguing the warrant lacked probable cause.
- The trial court held a hearing and issued an order denying Frasier's motion to suppress.
- The trial court certified its order for interlocutory appeal, and the Court of Appeals of Indiana accepted jurisdiction to review the denial of the suppression motion.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule permit the admission of evidence obtained via a search warrant based on potentially stale and uncorroborated informant tips, and does the plain view doctrine permit the admission of incriminating digital image files inadvertently discovered while executing that warrant's authorization to search a computer for different types of records?
Opinions:
Majority - Sullivan, J.
Yes, the good faith exception applies, and the computer images are admissible under the plain view doctrine. Assuming without deciding that the warrant was unsupported by probable cause, the evidence is still admissible because the officer's reliance on the warrant was objectively reasonable under the good faith exception established in United States v. Leon. The affidavit was not so lacking in indicia of probable cause as to render official belief in its existence entirely unreasonable, especially since the officer conducted some corroboration and included both favorable and unfavorable information. Furthermore, the images found on the computer are admissible under the plain view doctrine because the officer was lawfully present (by virtue of his good-faith reliance on the warrant) when he inadvertently discovered them. A closed computer file is not outside the plain view doctrine, as an officer executing a warrant to search for digital records must necessarily open files to determine their contents and cannot be expected to rely on potentially misleading file names.
Dissenting - Darden, J.
No, the good faith exception should not apply, and the evidence should be suppressed. The probable cause affidavit was so lacking in indicia of reliability that it renders any official belief in its existence unreasonable. The affidavit was permeated with stale, multi-level hearsay from confidential sources whose credibility was not established. The independent police corroboration was minimal and insufficient to cure these defects. Therefore, the third exception to the Leon good faith rule applies, and allowing the evidence to be admitted would subvert the fundamental requirement for probable cause.
Analysis:
This decision significantly clarifies the application of the good faith exception and the plain view doctrine to digital evidence searches. It establishes that an officer's objectively reasonable, good-faith reliance on a warrant satisfies the 'lawful presence' requirement for a plain view seizure, even if the warrant is later invalidated. The case sets a key precedent for computer searches by holding that 'opening' a digital file to ascertain its contents is a necessary part of a search for records and does not defeat a plain view claim for contraband inadvertently found within. This gives law enforcement considerable latitude when discovering evidence of one crime while searching a computer for another pursuant to a warrant.
