« Ind. Courts - "Clark Commissioners OK legal help center for courthouse" | Main | Ind. Decisions - 7th Circuit interprets Indiana statute in bankruptcy case; Noteworthy discussion of legislative digests [Updated] »

Friday, February 19, 2010

Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 2 today (and 5 NFP)

For publication opinions today (2):

In James Dorsett v. State of Indiana, a 12-page, 2-1 opinion, Judge Najam writes:

James Dorsett appeals from his conviction for operating a vehicle while intoxicated, as a Class A misdemeanor, following a bench trial.1 Dorsett raises a single issue for our review, namely, whether the State presented sufficient evidence to support his conviction. We reverse and remand with instructions. * * *

Nonetheless, while the State did present sufficient evidence that Dorsett operated his vehicle while intoxicated, to convict Dorsett of a Class A misdemeanor the State was also required to show that Dorsett's operation of that vehicle “endanger[ed] a person.” I.C. § 9-30-5-2(b). The element of endangerment can be established by evidence showing that the defendant's condition or operating manner could have endangered any person, including the public, the police, or the defendant. Staley v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1245, 1249 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (citing Blinn v. State, 677 N.E.2d 51, 54 (Ind. Ct. App. 1997)), trans. denied. Endangerment does not require that a person other than the defendant be in the path of the defendant's vehicle or in the same area to obtain a conviction. Id. at 1251 (citing State v. Krohn, 521 N.E.2d 374, 377 (Ind. Ct. App. 1988)). * * *

Thus, we hold, following Outlaw, that the State was required to submit proof of “endangerment” that went beyond mere intoxication in order for the defendant to be convicted of operating while intoxicated, as a Class A misdemeanor. Here, Dorsett was found intoxicated inside of his parked vehicle, and no evidence other than his intoxication suggests that Dorsett was operating his motor vehicle in a manner that endangered himself or any other person. Hence, the State failed to present sufficient evidence that Dorsett operated his vehicle while intoxicated in a manner that endangered a person, and we must reverse his conviction for the Class A misdemeanor. * * *

FRIEDLANDER, J., concurs.
BRADFORD, J., concurs in part and dissents in part with separate opinion. [That begins, at p. 10] While I agree that the State is required to present evidence beyond mere intoxication in order to prove endangerment, I conclude that the State has done so here. As such, I respectfully dissent from the majority's reversal of Dorsett's Class A misdemeanor operating a vehicle while intoxicated conviction.

In State of Indiana v. Maurice Combs, a 12-page opinion, Judge Najam writes:
The State appeals the trial court’s order that the Indiana State Police (“State Police”) pay the towing and storage fees due and owing to McClead’s Towing and Storage (“McClead’s”) for seven vehicles owned by Maurice Combs. The State raises a single issue for our review, which we restate as whether the State has made a prima facie showing that the court’s judgment is clearly erroneous. We affirm. * * *

In sum, we hold that the State may not use this appeal from the trial court’s order on Combs’ contempt request to collaterally attack the December 9 Order. We also hold that the State and State Police were represented in the civil action by the Madison County Prosecutor pursuant to Indiana Code Section 34-24-1-3, and that service on the Madison County Prosecutor’s office was service on the State and the State Police in the civil action. Finally, we hold that the State’s attempt to challenge the language of the plea agreement in the criminal action has no bearing on the State and the State Police’s July 14 Stipulation or subsequent filings in the civil action.

NFP civil opinions today (1):

Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of S.H.; J.P. v. IDCS (NFP)

NFP criminal opinions today (4):

James D. Ford v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Joshua Craig Reeves v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Richard H. Edwards v. State of Indiana (NFP)

J.E. v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Posted by Marcia Oddi on February 19, 2010 12:34 PM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions