« Courts - More on Kentucky courts' budget crunch | Main | Ind. Courts - More on: Ex post facto application of sex offender requirements for offenses committed outside Indiana and the applicability of the federal law, SORNA, to Indiana cases is at issue before the COA »
Wednesday, September 05, 2012
Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 2 today (and 6 NFP)
For publication opinions today (2):
In Cody B. Honeycutt v. State of Indiana , a 10-page opinion, Judge Vaidik writes:
Cody B. Honeycutt was arrested and a few days later pled guilty, without counsel, to Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana and a traffic infraction and was sentenced to one year with all but eight days suspended. When the results of Honeycutt’s blood draw came back positive for marijuana a few days later, the State added two more charges under the same cause number: Class A misdemeanor operating while intoxicated and Class C misdemeanor operating a vehicle with a Schedule I or II controlled substance in his body. Honeycutt, now represented by counsel, filed a motion to dismiss these charges on grounds that they were barred by the Successive Prosecution Statute because all four charges were connected by a single scheme or plan and therefore should have been charged together. The trial court denied his motion, and Honeycutt was found guilty in a bench trial. Concluding that the trial court abused its discretion in denying Honeycutt’s motion to dismiss, we reverse the trial court. * * *In Napoleon Gracia, Sr. v. State of Indiana , a 10-page opinion, Judge Vaidik writes:
Even if we assume that a defendant can waive this issue when he knows that a second set of charges may be on the horizon, there was no valid waiver here because Honeycutt was neither aware of the rights he was waiving under the Successive Prosecution Statute nor was he represented by an attorney. We therefore cannot say that Honeycutt waived his challenge under the Successive Prosecution Statute.
The trial court abused its discretion in denying Honeycutt’s motion to dismiss the charges of Class A misdemeanor operating while intoxicated and Class C misdemeanor operating a vehicle with a Schedule I or II controlled substance in his body. Reversed.
Napoleon Gracia, Sr. was convicted of one felony and two misdemeanor counts stemming from a physical altercation with police officers. On appeal, Gracia contends that the State engaged in impermissible forum shopping when it filed charges against him in Howard Superior Court I. Gracia also argues that the trial court erred in refusing to give a jury instruction on excessive use of force by police and that his sentence is inappropriate. We conclude that while the filing of charges in Howard Superior Court I was error, Gracia did not object to the filing and must therefore show fundamental error. We find that he has failed to do so. We also conclude that Gracia was not entitled to the jury instruction at issue and that Gracia’s sentence is not inappropriate. We affirm.NFP civil opinions today (3):
NFP criminal opinions today (3):
Posted by Marcia Oddi on September 5, 2012 11:33 AM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions