Melvin Washington versus the State of Indiana - Case Study Example

Melvin also informed Officer Reynolds that he had a valid license for the weapon. Washington was handcuffed and upon discovering the weapon under the seat the Officer also found a bag of marijuana that was next to the handgun. Despite the presence of valid handgun permits the officer issued Washington a summons to show up in court.

Issues
The key issue is that of Melvin Washington’s interlocutory appeal in retaliation for the court’s denial of his motion that demands that all evidence discovered while the vehicle was searched be repressed. He states that the search was in direct violation of the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution and also that of Article 1, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution.

Decisions (Holdings)
On November 12, 2008, Washington was charged by the State for the possession of marijuana, as a Class A offense and a Class C infraction for not having fully functional headlights. On 29th April 2009, Washington appealed to suppress the drugs found in his vehicle. This motion was denied by the court on the 18th of May, after an analysis of evidence and briefs from both parties. However, the court accepted Washington’s interlocutory appeal in August.

Reasoning (Rationale)
The justification for the bases of the decision taken by the court is primarily focused on placing paramount importance on officer safety. The action taken by Officer Reynolds was therefore relevant as he searched for the weapon to ensure his safety.

Separate Opinions
There are divergent opinions about the case mostly because of the lack of a warrant obtained to search the vehicle when no prior suspicion was aroused and Washington has cooperated to the fullest.

Analysis
The case presented clashes on interesting aspects: that which ensure the safety of police officers or one that serves to protect the constitutional right of citizens. Read More