FILED Dec 19 2019, 9:28 am CLERK Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals and Tax Court ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Stephen T. Owens Curtis T. Hill, Jr. Public Defender of Indiana Attorney General of Indiana Jonathan O. Chenoweth Tyler G. Banks Deputy Public Defender Supervising Deputy Attorney Indianapolis, Indiana General Indianapolis, Indiana IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA Ricci Davis, December 19, 2019 Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No. 19A-PC-984 v. Appeal from the Huntington Superior Court State of Indiana, The Honorable Jennifer Newton, Appellee-Plaintiff. Judge Trial Court Cause No. 35D01-1511-PC-22 Brown, Judge. Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 19A-PC-984 | December 19, 2019 Page 1 of 32 [1] Ricci Davis appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. We affirm. Facts and Procedural History [2] The relevant facts as discussed in Davis’s direct appeal follow: Shortly before 11:00 p.m. on May 19, 2014, a man called the Huntington County Sheriff’s Department on its non-emergency line and reported that he had a warrant and “was strung out on meth and to come get him and take it all out of his house.” (Tr. p. 99). In response to the call, the Sheriff’s Department dispatched the Huntington Police Department to 533 East Franklin Street, Huntington, Indiana, upon verification that the occupant thereof, Davis, had an active warrant. ***** Fifteen minutes after the police had first knocked on the door, Davis came downstairs, along with Thomas Hale (Hale) and Amanda (Casto). The officers escorted him outside, placed him in handcuffs, and administered his Miranda warnings. Davis indicated that he and Hale had been manufacturing methamphetamine on the second floor of the house. Davis further stated that when they heard the officers knocking on the door, Hale began hiding the supplies. Thus, Davis offered to accompany the officers inside to show them where everything was. For safety reasons, the officers would not allow Davis back into the house, but upon questioning as to whether there was an active lab that could pose any danger to the officers, Davis assured them that everything was safe. As the officers climbed the staircase, they detected the “very distinct,” “overwhelming chemical” odor associated with manufacturing methamphetamine. (Tr. pp. 247, 262). The odor was most potent in the upstairs bathroom, emanating from the toilet and the sink in particular. Once they confirmed that there Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 19A-PC-984 | December 19, 2019 Page 2 of 32 was nobody else in the house, the officers went back outside to retrieve their protective gear. After obtaining consent to search the home from the landlord, several officers trained in dismantling methamphetamine labs entered the house to process the scene. No active methamphetamine lab was discovered, nor did the police officers recover any finished methamphetamine product. However, spread throughout nearly every room of the house, the officers found evidence of all of the ingredients and other equipment necessary to manufacture methamphetamine, including: numerous empty boxes and blister packs that had contained pseudoephedrine pills; ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals