First things first, because while you may at some point be able to bring suit against the police you have to deal with your criminal
matter first. You will want to let your lawyer know everything that went on and that you believe was improper, because it is in the criminal court
where you will be able to challenge the constutionality of the police conduct, and so it's the criminal case that gets to more or less define how viable a civil suit you have.
This is not Indiana law but 4th and 5th Amendman law, as the involve your fundamental rights. The US Supreme Court has said that there is no bright line that separates what is unconstitutional from what is Constutional. Determinations of whether the police have overstepped their authority and trampled upon another's rights must be made on a case by case basis at hearings designed to ferret out the wrongdoing. The standard that the court is supposed to apply is what it would be reasonable for a police officer to do under all of the facts and circumstances.
So at this hearing the prosecutor would call the officer and question him as to why he stopped you, and everything else up to the time of your arrest. His questions would be designed to make the police officer show that everything he said and did from the moment he stopped you was reasonable under all of hte circumstances. For instance, if he claims that he got an anonymous tip about a crime having been committed by a person driving a vehicle like yours, he would be able to show that he had the probable cause
to stop you, even though you hadn't been driving erratically.
In any event, once he is through your lawyer would be able to cross examine the officer to show just how UNreasonable all of the police actions were. At the conclusion of all of the evidence, the judge would rule for one side or the other. If any statements were thrown out, any contraband was thrown out, and the breathalyze results thrown out because the judge ruled that they were obtained improperly, there wouldn't be much left of your case.On the other hand, if the court feels that the police were reasonable under all of the circumstances, all of the evidence you object to will come in and the case would go on.
A ruling that the police were out of bounds here would be very helpful to a civil suit. A ruling that it was all proper, on the other extreme would mean you would have a great deal of difficulty finding a lawyer who will be interested in your civil suit.
Suppression hearings are never a slam dunk, even when the law looks like it has come up your way. It always depends on the circumstances, which can carve out exceptions.
So I'm pleased that you have a lawyer and make sure that he knows you are wanting to sue the city and the police, so that he can look towards safeguarding your rights not just in criminal court but in terms of a civil suit down the road.
I wish you luck.