OPINION
SHEPARD, Senior Judge.
A contention that certain evidence admitted at trial was the product of unreasonable search or seizure, the Indiana Supreme Court has explained, does not ipso facto describe an error vitiating the need for a contemporaneous objection.
Appellant Kevin J. Mamon asserts that the state trooper who stopped him for following too closely in a construction zone did not have reasonable suspicion to do so. He thus says the convictions...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.