« Environment - "SCOTUS Expected To Hear Asian Carp Arguments Today" | Main | Environment - "Crawford County residents question biomass power project" »

Friday, January 15, 2010

Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 1 today (and 3 NFP)

For publication opinions today (1):

In Michael P. Dunn v. State of Indiana , a 9-page opinion, Judge Crone writes:

Michael P. Dunn appeals his conviction for battery causing serious bodily injury, a class C felony, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting evidence. We affirm. * * *

The prosecutor asked her whether she remembered making a phone call to Rollins about an hour after the incident and leaving a voicemail message, and she again stated that she did not remember. Id. at 319-20. The prosecutor then asked that the voicemail message be admitted. Defense counsel again objected because a foundation had not been laid for its admission. Id. at 321-22. The prosecutor responded that Rollins had testified on redirect that he received a phone call from Mathys about an hour or an hour and a half after the incident. Outside the presence of the jury, the State played the voicemail message to Mathys to refresh her memory. The jury was brought back into the courtroom, the prosecutor asked Mathys whether it was her voice on the voicemail message, and she testified that it was. The trial court then admitted the voicemail message over Dunn’s objection, and it was played to the jury: * * *

Dunn argues that, because the State failed to lay a proper foundation, the trial court erred in admitting Mathys’s voicemail message to Rollins. * * *

Dunn contends that the voicemail message was inadmissible pursuant to Indiana Rules of Evidence 602 and 701. * * *

[W]e conclude that the admission of the voicemail message did not violate either Evidence Rule 602 or 701.4 We therefore affirm the trial court.
______________
[ILB: Of interest, particularly in light this post earlier today, is footnote #3 on p. 3.] [3] The appellant’s appendix contains a copy of the entire transcript and exhibit volume, as well as numerous other court documents that are unnecessary for the resolution of the issue on review. The result is a five-volume appellant’s appendix of over 800 pages, an enormous waste of paper and expense. We refer appellant’s counsel to Indiana Appellate Rule 50, which describes the proper contents of an appendix, including, among other things, only those portions of the transcript that are important to the issues on appeal.

NFP civil opinions today (0):

NFP criminal opinions today (3):

Leon Wooden v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Victor Sobolewski v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Gordon Armour v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Posted by Marcia Oddi on January 15, 2010 10:21 AM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions