Klinique J. Champion v. State of Indiana ( 2016 )

FILED
Dec 09 2016, 9:18 am
CLERK
Indiana Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
and Tax Court
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Deborah Markisohn Gregory F. Zoeller
Marion County Public Defender Agency Attorney General of Indiana
Indianapolis, Indiana Richard C. Webster
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Klinique J. Champion, December 9, 2016
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
49A02-1604-CR-893
v. Appeal from the Marion Superior
Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable Angela Dow
Appellee-Plaintiff. Davis, Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
49G16-1511-F6-039447
Pyle, Judge.
Statement of the Case
[1] Klinique Champion (“Champion”) appeals, following a bench trial, her
conviction of two counts of intimidation, one as a Class A misdemeanor and
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 49A02-1604-CR-893 | December 9, 2016 Page 1 of 7
one as a Level 6 felony. She challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to
support the convictions. Concluding that the evidence is sufficient, we affirm.
[2] We affirm.
Issue
[3] Whether there is sufficient evidence to support Champion’s
intimidation convictions.
Facts
[4] Champion and Ray Griffin (“Griffin”) have two children, J.G. (“J.G.”), who
was born in 2004, and R.G. (“R.G.”), who was born in 2005, (collectively “the
children”). Shortly after R.G.’s birth, the parents’ relationship ended.
Champion was awarded custody of both children and moved to Illinois. In
2011, Griffin married Sabrina Hoggard (“Hoggard”), who also had two
children. Griffin and Hoggard together had an additional two children.
[5] In 2014, Griffin filed an emergency petition and was awarded temporary
custody of R.G. and J.G. while they were visiting him in Indiana. Following
the change of custody, Champion began accusing Griffin and Hoggard of
abusing R.G. and J.G. Specifically, Champion made eleven reports of abuse,
none of which were substantiated.
[6] On October 27, 2015, Champion sent the following text to Hoggard: “Your
better off giving my kids back cause I’m bout to bring h*** to ya door step.”
(State’s Ex. 1) (incorrect grammar and misspellings in original). The next day,
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 49A02-1604-CR-893 | December 9, 2016 Page 2 of 7
Champion sent the following texts to Hoggard: “How you been treating my
kids Im shoot yo s*** up show the police . . . blow yo head off . . . plan yo
funeral b**** on my soul.” (State’s Ex. 1) (incorrect grammar and spellings in
original).
[7] On October 29, 2015, an administrator at the children’s school contacted
Griffin after Champion appeared at the school and asked about the children.
Concerned for the children’s safety, Griffin asked Hoggard to pick up the
children from school.1 Hoggard was driving the children home when she
observed Champion make a U-turn on Post Road and pull up behind her.
While they were all stopped at a red light, Champion jumped out of her car, ran
up to Hoggard’s vehicle, pounded on the window, and threatened to “whoop
[Hoggard’s] a**.” (Tr. 44). When the light turned green, Hoggard hurried to
Griffin’s apartment. Champion followed her and then drove off.
[8] The following morning, still concerned for his children’s safety, Griffin drove
them to school. As they all exited the car in the school parking lot, R.G.
observed her mother exit a nearby vehicle. Griffin hurried his children toward
the school, but before they arrived at the front door, Champion grabbed R.G’s
coat and yelled for her and J.G. to get into Champion’s car. Champion was
yelling, “Give me my babies, give me my babies.” (Tr. 152). When Griffin
attempted to free R.G. from Champion’s grasp, Champion placed Griffin in a
1
At that time, Griffin and Hoggard were living separately. However, Hoggard continued to care for R.G.
and J.G. after school. Griffin and Hoggard had reconciled at the time of the trial.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 49A02-1604-CR-893 | December 9, 2016 Page 3 of 7
headlock and sprayed him in the face with mace. School employees heard the
commotion and were able to get the children into the school. Champion fled
on foot into a nearby neighborhood.
[9] On November 6, 2015, Champion sent the following texts to Hoggard: “Tell
the police Ill be there again . . . Y’all gone die my kids so scared . . . my kids are
the ones your abusing keep a watch on your kids they might end up kidnapped
and rapped and molested too.” (State’s Ex. 2) (Incorrect grammar and
misspellings in original). Champion was arrested in Illinois that same day.
[10] The State charged Champion with eleven counts, including intimidation as a
Class A misdemeanor for the threatening texts that she sent to Hoggard on
October 27, 2015. The information charging that offense provides as follows:
On or about October 27, 2015, Klinique Champion did
communicate a threat to Sabrina Hoggard, with the intent that
Sabrina Hoggard be placed in fear of retaliation for a prior lawful
act, to-wit: having lawful custody of Ms. Champion’s children.
(App. 31). The State also charged Champion with intimidation as a Level 6
felony for the threatening texts she sent to Hoggard on November 6, 2015. The
information charging that offense provides as follows:
On or about November 6, 2015, Klinique Champion did
communicate a threat to commit a forcible felony, to-wit:
murder and/or rape and/or molestation and/or kidnapping to
Sabrina Hoggard, with the intent that Sabrina Hoggard be placed
in fear of retaliation for a prior lawful act, to-wit: having lawful
custody of Ms. Champion’s children.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 49A02-1604-CR-893 | December 9, 2016 Page 4 of 7
(App. 31-32).
[11] At trial, Champion admitted sending the texts. At the conclusion of the
presentation of evidence, she filed a motion to dismiss the intimidation counts.
Champion specifically argued that the State had failed to prove beyond a
reasonable doubt that Hoggard had engaged in the prior lawful act of having
lawful custody of Champion’s children. According to Champion, Griffin was
the only person who had lawful custody of the children. The trial court denied
Champion’s motion, concluding that Hoggard had lawful custody of the
children “as it was relayed to her by her husband and they were legally married.
She was on the [school’s] emergency contact list.” (Tr. 212).
[12] The trial court subsequently convicted Champion of eight of the eleven charged
counts, including the two challenged counts of intimidation. Champion
appeals only the convictions for the two counts of intimidation.
Decision
[13] Champion argues that there is insufficient evidence to support the intimidation
convictions. 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 reweigh the evidence or judge witness credibility. Id. We
will affirm the conviction unless no reasonable fact finder could find the
elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Id. The evidence is
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 49A02-1604-CR-893 | December 9, 2016 Page 5 of 7
sufficient if an inference may be reasonably drawn from it to support the
verdict. Id. at 147.
[14] To convict Champion of intimidation as a Class A misdemeanor, the State was
required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Champion communicated a
threat to Hoggard with the intent that Hoggard be placed in fear of retaliation
for having lawful custody of Champion’s children. See IND. CODE § 35-45-2-1.
To convict Champion of the Level 6 felony, the State had to additionally prove
that the threat was to commit a forcible felony. See id.
[15] Champion’s sole argument is that the State failed to prove that Hoggard had
lawful custody of J.G. and R.G. Champion’s argument is premised on her
belief that lawful custody and legal custody are the same thing. They are not.
In In re Adoption of B.C.H., 22 N.E.3d 580, 585 (Ind. 2014), the Indiana Supreme
Court explained that lawful custody simply means custody that is not
unlawful.2 The Court further explained that “there are many sources of
potential lawful custody that span the spectrum from court-ordered custody of a
child to de facto custodianship to informal caretaking arrangements, to name a
few.” Id.[16] Here, Hoggard, who was married to Griffin, was both J.G.’s and R.G.’s
stepmother. A stepparent relationship is a strong indicator that a custodial and
2
Although the Indiana Supreme Court in B.C.H was interpreting the meaning of “lawful custody” within
INDIANA CODE § 31-19-9-1(a)(3), we find the Court’s analysis of this term instructive concerning the issue
before us.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 49A02-1604-CR-893 | December 9, 2016 Page 6 of 7
parental relationship exists. Richardson v. Richardson, 34 N.E.3d 696, 701 (Ind.
Ct. App. 2015). As a stepparent, Hoggard stood in loco parentis to J.G. and
R.G. In loco parentis means “in the place of a parent.” McReynolds v. State, 901
N.E.2d 1149, 1153 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (quoting BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY
803 (8th ed. 2004)). This doctrine refers to a person who has put herself in the
situation of a lawful parent by assuming obligations of the parental relationship
without going through the formalities of a legal adoption. McReynolds, 901
N.E.2d at 1153. This status, which results from intention, embodies both
assuming the parental status and discharging the parental duties. Id. Here,
Hoggard assumed the obligations of the parental relationship with J.G. and
R.G. We agree with the State that “Hoggard did have lawful custody of [J.G.
and R.G.] as their stepmother and caregiver.” (State’s Br. 13). We therefore
find sufficient evidence to support Champion’s intimidation convictions.
[17] Affirmed.
Bradford, J., and Altice, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 49A02-1604-CR-893 | December 9, 2016 Page 7 of 7