Serrano v. Indiana
Annotate this CaseAppellant Martin Serrano lost his truck in a forfeiture action based on the presence of cocaine residue found in the carpet of the vehicle, and on a box of quarters. Appellant challenged the sufficiency of the evidence, contending that the State failed to prove that the presence of cocaine in his truck was anything more than "incidental or fortuitous." The Court of Appeals agreed with Appellant’s argument. The Supreme Court found that though Appellant admitted he was a cocaine user, “there are numerous ways that cocaine residue may have made its way into the truck that [did] not involve the use of the vehicle in furthering the possession of cocaine.” The Supreme Court affirmed the appellate court’s decision.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.