# Caudill v. State

> Indiana Court of Appeals · May 12, 1993 · 613 N.E.2d 433

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9525554

## Case

- **Full name:** Michael A. CAUDILL, Appellant (Defendant Below), v. STATE of Indiana and the Indiana State Police, Appellee (Plaintiff Below)
- **Court:** Indiana Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** May 12, 1993
- **Citations:** 613 N.E.2d 433; 1993 Ind. App. LEXIS 504; 1993 WL 148822
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Baker
- **Judges:** Miller, Chezem, Baker
- **Cited by:** 19 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9525554

## Opinion text

BAKER, Judge,
concurring and dissent ing.
Although I agree with the majority's analysis of IND.CODE 34-4-80.1-1(c) and the rebuttable presumption it creates, I do not believe the $850 found on Caudill was seizable in this case because the State's own evidence rebutted the presumption the money was proceeds of a drug transaction.
The record reveals an informant paid Caudill between $350 and $400 in marked currency for an "eight-ball" of cocaine. When the detectives arrested Caudill several hours later, they found 4.4014 grams of cocaine in Caudill's front pocket, and $855 in cash. The State's own witnesses testified, however, that the $855 was not the same marked currency the informant gave Caudill earlier. Based on this testimony, we know the money was not proceeds from the earlier drug transaction; thus, the presumption of IND.CODE 84-4-80.1-1(c) was rebutted. I would reverse the seizure of the $850 in cash. In all other respects, I concur.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9525554. Public record. Not legal advice.