« Courts - "Prosecutorial misconduct alleged in half of capital cases" in Arizona | Main | Ind. Courts - Still more on: Morgan County Prosecutor to challenge expungement »

Monday, October 28, 2013

Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 1 today (and 2 NFP)

For publication opinions today (1):

In Chaunsey L. Fox v. State of Indiana, a 15-page opinion, Sr. Judge Darden writes:

Chaunsey L. Fox appeals his conviction of felony murder. Ind. Code § 35-42-1-1 (2007). We affirm.

Fox raises three issues, which we restate as:
I. Whether the court erred in denying Fox’s motions to dismiss.
II. Whether the trial court exhibited bias toward Fox.
III. Whether the prosecutor withheld exculpatory evidence. * * *

[I] Fox argues that the court should have dismissed the murder charges or suppressed his recorded statements from the June 20, 2011 and July 6, 2011 interviews because he was immune from prosecution on those charges pursuant to his agreement with the State. The State asserts that Fox breached the agreement, thereby rendering void the State’s promise not to prosecute him for murder. * * *

Fox has failed to establish a lack of evidence to support his conviction, and the court did not err in denying his renewed motion to dismiss and to suppress evidence.

[II] Fox argues that his conviction is improper because the trial judge demonstrated bias or prejudice against him in front of the jury. * * *

We conclude that Fox has failed to establish judicial bias and prejudice, and he was not placed in jeopardy.

[III] Fox claims the State withheld exculpatory evidence from him in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S. Ct. 1194, 10 L. Ed. 2d 215 (1963). * * * Fox, however, argues that the State had a duty under Brady to obtain all relevant documents from federal agencies and turn them over to him. He cites several cases from other jurisdictions and Bunch v. State, 964 N.E.2d 274 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012), trans. denied, in support of his argument. * * * Bunch does not compel a conclusion here that the State suppressed information by failing to obtain all documents from federal agencies, and we conclude that there was no Brady violation.

NFP civil opinions today (0):

NFP criminal opinions today (2):

Denielle R. Pharr v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Tyrez Boyd v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Posted by Marcia Oddi on October 28, 2013 12:00 PM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions