Eric Allen v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) ( 2016 )


Menu:
  • MEMORANDUM DECISION
    Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D),                                   FILED
    this Memorandum Decision shall not be                               May 26 2016, 8:42 am
    regarded as precedent or cited before any
    CLERK
    court except for the purpose of establishing                         Indiana Supreme Court
    Court of Appeals
    the defense of res judicata, collateral                                   and Tax Court
    estoppel, or the law of the case.
    ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT                                  ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
    Timothy P. Broden                                       Gregory F. Zoeller
    Lafayette, Indiana                                      Attorney General of Indiana
    Karl M. Scharnberg
    Deputy Attorney General
    Indianapolis, Indiana
    IN THE
    COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
    Eric Allen,                                             May 26, 2016
    Appellant-Defendant,                                    Court of Appeals Case No.
    79A04-1506-CR-601
    v.                                              Appeal from the Tippecanoe
    Circuit Court
    State of Indiana,                                       The Honorable Raymond Kirtley,
    Appellee-Plaintiff                                      Senior Judge
    Trial Court Cause No.
    79C01-1410-FC-17
    Bailey, Judge.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 79A04-1506-CR-601 | May 26, 2016           Page 1 of 10
    Case Summary
    [1]   Eric Allen (“Allen”) appeals his conviction for Operating a Motor Vehicle
    While Privileges Are Forfeited for Life, a Class C felony,1 raising the sole issue
    of whether there was sufficient evidence to support his conviction. We affirm.
    Facts and Procedural History
    [2]   At approximately 3:30 a.m. on June 21, 2014, Tippecanoe County Sheriff
    Department Deputy Alexander Feistel (“Deputy Feistel”) and Sergeant Robert
    Hainje (“Sergeant Hainje”) were on patrol in a marked squad car in Lafayette,
    Indiana when they saw three vehicles quickly turn from 18th Street onto the
    Veteran’s Memorial Parkway. As the cars headed east, they appeared to be
    racing. Deputy Feistel activated his radar and clocked the second car, a late
    model Chevrolet Caprice, going 68 m.p.h. and the third car, a Cadillac
    Escalade, going 71 m.p.h. in the 35 m.p.h. zone. The Escalade passed the
    Caprice, then both turned south onto Concord Road as the lead car continued
    on Veteran’s Memorial Parkway.
    [3]   The officers pursued the Caprice and Escalade onto Concord, where they
    observed the Caprice weaving and swerving over the center line. Deputy
    Feistel activated his emergency lights when the cars turned east onto Chilton
    1
    Ind. Code § 9-30-10-17 (Supp. 2013). This offense is now a Level 5 felony. We refer to the version of the
    statute in effect at the time Allen committed the offense.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 79A04-1506-CR-601 | May 26, 2016               Page 2 of 10
    Drive, the entrance to a residential subdivision. The Escalade turned left and
    stopped in an alley next to 2576 Chilton Drive. The Caprice also pulled into
    the alley, stopping just ahead of the Cadillac.
    [4]   Both officers exited the squad car. From his vantage point, Sergeant Hainje
    observed an African American man with facial stubble sitting low in the driver’s
    seat of the Caprice. As Deputy Feistel approached the Caprice, the car crept
    forward. Deputy Feistel yelled at the driver to stop while flashing a light at the
    side mirror. The Caprice paused, then turned right and accelerated into the
    alley running behind the houses and parallel to Chilton Drive. Deputy Feistel
    returned to his car and attempted to cut off the Caprice at the next intersection.
    He did not intercept the car, but shortly after saw a person on foot running at
    full speed southbound across Chilton.
    [5]   Meanwhile, Sergeant Hainje called for backup and gave descriptions of the
    Caprice and driver. Sergeant Hainje then interviewed the occupants of the
    Escalade, who indicated that Allen had been with them at Aces Pub on 18th
    Street and left in the Caprice when they left in the Escalade. A few minutes
    later, a responding officer located the unoccupied Caprice parked in the
    driveway behind 2708 Chilton Drive. Sergeant Hainje walked over and
    observed in the dew-covered grass a single set of footprints leading southbound
    away from the car and across Chilton into a weedy empty lot.
    [6]   At approximately 3:50 a.m., Deputy Nathan Beever (“Deputy Beever”), who
    had also responded to the call for backup, encountered a man matching the
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 79A04-1506-CR-601 | May 26, 2016   Page 3 of 10
    suspect’s description, later identified as Allen, walking just south of Chilton
    Drive. Allen’s shoes were wet and he had grass, burs, and weeds on his clothes
    and shoes. He was sweating heavily and showed signs of intoxication,
    including a strong alcohol odor on his breath, red watery eyes, slurred speech,
    and unstable balance. He admitted that he had been drinking at Aces Pub, but
    denied that he had been driving. He also stated that he lived with his sister at
    2576 Chilton Drive. The Caprice was registered to his sister at that address.
    [7]   Deputy Beever transported Allen to the Tippecanoe County Sherriff’s Office to
    take a sobriety test. Allen refused. Deputy Beever obtained a warrant for a
    blood draw, and Allen was taken to the hospital to complete it. The lab results
    showed a blood alcohol concentration of 0.19 percent.
    [8]   On October 31, 2014, Allen was charged with Operating a Motor Vehicle
    While Privileges Are Forfeited for Life, a Class C felony; Resisting Law
    Enforcement, as a Class D felony;2 and Operating a Vehicle While Intoxicated,
    as a Class A misdemeanor3 (“Count 3”). The State also alleged Allen was a
    Habitual Substance Offender.4 On December 29, 2014, the trial court granted
    2
    I.C. § 35-44.1-3-1(b)(1)(A).
    3
    I.C. § 9-30-5-2(b).
    4
    I.C. § 35-50-2-10.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 79A04-1506-CR-601 | May 26, 2016   Page 4 of 10
    the State’s motion to add a charge of Operating a Vehicle with At Least Fifteen-
    Hundredths (0.15) Gram of Alcohol, a Class A misdemeanor5 (“Count 5”).
    [9]    A bifurcated jury trial was conducted on April 15 and 16, 2015. During phase
    two, the State introduced into evidence Jasper Circuit Court records showing
    that on November 13, 2007, under cause number 37C01-0705-FD-268, Allen
    agreed to plead guilty to Operating a Vehicle as Habitual Traffic Violator, a
    Class D felony,6 and that as part of that plea agreement, his driving privileges
    would be suspended for life. The Jasper Circuit Court accepted the plea
    agreement and entered judgment of conviction on December 18, 2007. The
    State also introduced a certified copy of Allen’s driving record, which included
    the Jasper Circuit Court’s December 18, 2007 order, as well as a December 26,
    2007 nunc pro tunc order stating that the court “on its own motion, now finds
    that this Court’s order of December 18, 2007, is erroneous in that it fails to
    reflect that [Allen’s] driver’s privileges are suspended for his lifetime” and
    corrected the order to include the suspension. (Exhibit 6.)
    [10]   At the conclusion of trial, Allen was found guilty of all charges and the trial
    court entered judgments of conviction and adjudicated Allen a habitual
    substance offender. On May 11, 2015, the trial court held a sentencing hearing
    5
    I.C. § 9-30-5-1(b).
    6
    I.C. § 9-30-10-16(a)(1).
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 79A04-1506-CR-601 | May 26, 2016   Page 5 of 10
    and imposed a total aggregate sentence of fourteen years executed in the
    Indiana Department of Correction.
    [11]   On June 10, 2015, Allen filed a notice of appeal. On July 27, 2015, Allen, pro
    se, filed a motion to correct erroneous sentence, and the State responded with its
    own motion to correct error on September 8, 2015.7 The court held a hearing
    on the motions, and on November 12, 2015, issued an order merging Counts 3
    and 5, and imposing a modified aggregate sentence of six years executed in the
    DOC followed by eight years to be served in the Tippecanoe County
    Community Corrections.
    [12]   Allen now appeals.
    Discussion and Decision
    [13]   Allen challenges only the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction
    for operating a motor vehicle while privileges are forfeited for life. Our
    standard of review for sufficiency of the evidence claims is well settled. We
    consider only the probative evidence and reasonable inferences supporting the
    verdict. Drane v. State, 
    867 N.E.2d 144
    , 146 (Ind. 2007). We do not assess the
    credibility of witnesses or reweigh evidence. 
    Id. We will
    affirm the conviction
    7
    Meanwhile, the Tippecanoe County Clerk filed a notice of completion of transcript on September 23, 2015,
    and this Court acquired jurisdiction on that date pursuant to Indiana Appellate Rule 8. On October 7, 2015,
    Allen filed with this Court a motion to stay consideration of appeal so that the trial court could address the
    motions to correct error. On October 16, 2015, this Court granted Allen’s motion to stay, ordered the trial
    court to rule on the motions to correct error within thirty days, and ordered Allen to submit a status report
    within forty-five days.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 79A04-1506-CR-601 | May 26, 2016                Page 6 of 10
    unless “no reasonable fact-finder could find the elements of the crime proven
    beyond a reasonable doubt.” 
    Id. (quoting Jenkins
    v. State, 
    726 N.E.2d 268
    , 270
    (Ind. 2000)). “The evidence is sufficient if an inference may reasonably be
    drawn from it to support the verdict.” 
    Id. at 147
    (quoting Pickens v. State, 
    751 N.E.2d 331
    , 334 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001)).
    [14]   Pursuant to Indiana Code section 9-30-10-17(a), a person who operates a motor
    vehicle after the person’s driving privileges are forfeited for life under Indiana
    Code section 9-30-10-16 commits a Class C felony. The State charged that, on
    or about June 21, 2014, Allen “did operate a motor vehicle after his driving
    privileges were forfeited for his lifetime under Indiana Code 9-30-10-16
    pursuant to a conviction in the Jasper Circuit Court, Jasper County, State of
    Indiana under cause number 37C01-0705-FD-268, on or about December 18,
    2007[.]” (App. 121.)
    [15]   At trial, the State introduced ample evidence that Allen was driving a Chevrolet
    Caprice through the streets of Lafayette in the early morning hours of June 21,
    2014. The State also introduced into evidence Jasper Circuit Court records and
    Allen’s driver’s record, both of which showed that Allen was convicted in the
    Jasper Circuit Court on December 18, 2007 of a violation of Indiana Code
    section 9-30-10-16(a). The statute defining that offense also provides: “In
    addition to any criminal penalty, a person who is convicted of a felony under
    subsection (a) forfeits the privilege of operating a motor vehicle for life.” I.C. §
    9-30-10-16(c). Consistent with this provision, Allen’s plea agreement provided
    that his driving privileges would be forfeited for his lifetime. The Jasper Circuit
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 79A04-1506-CR-601 | May 26, 2016   Page 7 of 10
    Court’s nunc pro tunc order further clarified that Allen’s driving privileges were,
    indeed, forfeited for life. There was sufficient evidence to support Allen’s
    conviction.
    [16]   Allen, however, argues there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction
    because he did not have knowledge that his driving privileges were forfeited for
    life. As this Court has previously held, “[k]nowledge of a lifetime forfeiture is
    not an element of Indiana Code § 9-30-10-17, so proof of knowledge is not
    necessary to sustain a conviction.” Pillow v. State, 
    986 N.E.2d 343
    , 345 (Ind. Ct.
    App. 2013) (citing Brock v. State, 
    955 N.E.2d 195
    , 205 (Ind. 2011), cert. denied).
    In this way, Section 9-30-10-17 operates as a strict liability offense with no
    knowledge requirement. 
    Brock, 955 N.E.2d at 205
    .
    [17]   Nevertheless, Allen contends that because a violation of Section 9-30-10-17 is a
    Class C felony carrying a sentencing range of two to eight years, I.C. § 35-50-2-
    6, the imposition of strict liability to the offense violates his due process rights
    guaranteed under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.8 Allen
    relies on U.S. v. Wulff, 
    758 F.2d 1121
    (6th Cir. 1985), in which the Sixth Circuit
    Court of Appeals affirmed a district court’s finding that a felony conviction
    under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 16 U.S.C. § 703 et seq., violated the due
    process clause of the Fifth Amendment because the felony offense did not
    require proof of scienter, was not known to the common law, and the penalty
    8
    “[N]or shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law[.]” U.S.
    Const. amend. XIV, § 1.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 79A04-1506-CR-601 | May 26, 2016                 Page 8 of 10
    was severe and would result in irreparable damage to one’s reputation. 
    Wulff, 758 F.2d at 1122
    . There, the court found that a felony conviction and
    maximum sentence of two years or a $2000 fine, or both, constituted a
    “substantial” penalty carrying risk of reputation damage. 
    Id. at 1125.
    [18]   Assuming, without deciding, that Allen’s as applied challenge to the statute
    would be otherwise meritorious, Allen’s argument ultimately is unavailing
    because there is evidence that Allen had knowledge that his license was
    forfeited for life. Certified copies of Jasper Circuit Court records show that
    Allen signed a plea agreement stating that his “driving privileges will be
    suspended for his lifetime.” (Exhibit 7.) The circuit court accepted his plea
    agreement and entered judgment of conviction on December 18, 2007.
    Consistent with the plea agreement, the lifetime suspension of his driving
    privileges was noted in the court’s December 26, 2007 nunc pro tunc order and
    the abstract of judgment, both of which were included in Allen’s driver’s record.
    Further, a table in Allen’s driver’s record lists at least three separate “indefinite”
    suspensions (including the December 18, 2007 suspension) and shows that
    notice was mailed to Allen on January 28, 2005, January 8, 2008, and January
    10, 2008. (Exhibit 6.) In light of this evidence of knowledge, we cannot
    conclude that Allen was denied due process of law when he was convicted of
    operating a motor vehicle while privileges are forfeited for life.
    Conclusion
    [19]   There was sufficient evidence to support Allen’s conviction.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 79A04-1506-CR-601 | May 26, 2016   Page 9 of 10
    [20]   Affirmed.
    Bradford, J., and Altice, J., concur.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 79A04-1506-CR-601 | May 26, 2016   Page 10 of 10