Erik D. Flynn v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) ( 2020 )


Menu:
  • MEMORANDUM DECISION
    Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D),
    this Memorandum Decision shall not be                                        FILED
    regarded as precedent or cited before any                               Feb 21 2020, 9:26 am
    court except for the purpose of establishing                                 CLERK
    the defense of res judicata, collateral                                  Indiana Supreme Court
    Court of Appeals
    and Tax Court
    estoppel, or the law of the case.
    ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT                                   ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
    Elizabeth A. Bellin                                      Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
    Elkhart, Indiana                                         Attorney General of Indiana
    Justin F. Roebel
    Deputy Attorney General
    Indianapolis, Indiana
    IN THE
    COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
    Erik D. Flynn,                                           February 21, 2020
    Appellant-Defendant,                                     Court of Appeals Case No.
    19A-CR-1757
    v.                                               Appeal from the Elkhart Superior
    Court
    State of Indiana,                                        The Honorable Stephen R.
    Appellee-Plaintiff                                       Bowers, Judge
    Trial Court Cause No.
    20D02-1812-F5-367
    May, Judge.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1757 | February 21, 2020                Page 1 of 12
    [1]   Erik D. Flynn appeals his conviction of Level 5 felony aiding trafficking in a
    controlled substance with an inmate. 1 He raises two issues for our review,
    which we restate as: (1) whether the charging information was so deficient it
    amounted to fundamental error, and (2) whether the State presented sufficient
    evidence Flynn committed Level 5 felony aiding trafficking in a controlled
    substance with an inmate. We affirm.
    Facts and Procedural History
    [2]   Investigator Fred Mock of the Elkhart County Sheriff’s Department learned
    contraband was being brought into the Elkhart County Jail and delivered to
    inmates working in the jail’s kitchen. On July 10, 2018, officers searched the
    inmate kitchen workers as they left the kitchen to return to their housing pod.
    The officers found a cylindrical package tightly wrapped in cellophane
    containing a green leafy substance and cigarette rolling papers on inmate James
    Woodard. The Indiana State Police tested the substance and determined that it
    contained Fluoro ADB, a chemical compound found in synthetic marijuana. 2
    Flynn was an inmate kitchen worker, but he was absent from work on July 10,
    2018, because he had an appointment in the jail’s medical ward.
    1
    Ind. Code §§ 35-44.1-3-5; 35-41-2-4.
    2
    The spelling of the substance varies throughout the record. The chemical name of the substance is methyl 2-
    (1-(5-fluroopentyl)-1H-indazole-3-carboxamido)-3,3-dimethylbutanote [5F-ADB; 5F-MDMB-PINACA].
    (Tr. Vol. II at 113; State’s Ex. 6.) For the sake of simplicity and consistency, we refer to the substance as
    “Fluoro ADB.” (App. Vol. II at 16.)
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1757 | February 21, 2020                Page 2 of 12
    [3]   The jail housed all the kitchen workers in the same pod at the jail, and on July
    11, 2018, jail officers searched their housing unit. The inmates were instructed
    to line up against the wall, and Corrections Officer Tim Lechlitner of the
    Elkhart County Sheriff’s Office ran his police dog past the inmates. The dog
    alerted that Flynn might be in possession of contraband. Officers then removed
    Flynn from the unit to strip search him. Officer Lechlitner then had his dog
    sniff all the bunks on the unit. The dog indicated that a few of the bunks,
    including Flynn’s bunk, might contain contraband. Officers searched Flynn’s
    possessions and found cigarettes.
    [4]   Officers performed an initial strip search of Flynn and found a note in his shoe.
    The note stated:
    Yeah, we got popped off yesterday. Lost an ounce of Toon + 30
    strips. I hate rats. I was over at medical waitin to see the Dr.
    yesterday too, trying to see you, but I . . .was askin about you. I
    am trying to let you C who I am. Im also trying get ahold of my
    sis to get some pics, she ain’t answering her phone, Ill get em tho.
    So tell me, how you get involved in a robbery? How you get
    caught? Look, I got 2 □’s 4 you but, can you get a lite? Or you
    can sell em. Matter of fact, here they are, ma. I don’t want you
    2 think I just be talkin. I don’t play games. I’m tryin to get you
    somethin better. Its gonna be hard now tha my plug got popped
    off. But Ill keep tryin. Soon as I touch it, you got it, thats my
    word.
    (State’s Ex. 2) (errors in original). Investigator Mock then interviewed Flynn.
    During the interview with Investigator Mock, Flynn stated he knew a civilian
    jail employee was bringing contraband into the jail and delivering it to inmate
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1757 | February 21, 2020   Page 3 of 12
    Craig Green. Flynn acknowledged writing the note and said he planned to
    deliver it to a female inmate. Flynn told Investigator Mock that the
    “somethin[g] better” referred to in the note meant “tune.” 3 (State’s Ex. 4 at
    9:37:45-9:38:19.) 4 Flynn also said his reference in the note to a “plug” meant
    Green. (Id. at 9:38:25-9:38:39.) Following Investigator Mock’s interview with
    Flynn, Officer Lechlitner performed a second strip search. Before the second
    strip search, Flynn handed over tobacco to Officer Lechlitner that Flynn had
    hidden in his pants.
    [5]   On December 26, 2018, the State filed an information charging Flynn with
    Level 5 felony aiding trafficking with an inmate. The information provided:
    The affiant of the Probable Cause Affidavit filed herewith swears
    that on or about July 10, 2018, at the County of Elkhart, State of
    Indiana, one ERIK D. FLYNN . . . did knowingly, and without
    prior authorization of the person in charge of the penal facility or
    juvenile facility, to wit: Elkhart County Jail, deliver or carry into
    the penal facility or juvenile facility with intent to deliver, a
    controlled substance to an inmate or child of the facility; all of
    which is contrary to the form of I.C. § 35-44.1-3-5(b)(1) and I.C.
    § 35-41-2-4; contrary to the form of the statute in such cases made
    and provided; and against the peace and dignity of the State of
    Indiana.
    3
    Investigator Mock testified, “Tune is a common name for synthetic marijuana.” (Tr. Vol. II at 71.)
    4
    Citations to State’s Exhibit 4 refer to the time of day the interview was recorded as indicated on the
    timestamp present on the top left corner of the video display.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1757 | February 21, 2020                   Page 4 of 12
    (App. Vol. II at 14.) The probable cause affidavit stated that the suspected
    synthetic drugs recovered from inmate James Woodard contained Fluoro ADB.
    [6]   The trial court held a bench trial on April 9, 2019. Melinda McNair, a forensic
    scientist with the Indiana State Police, testified that Fluoro ADB “was federally
    controlled on April 10th, 2017, and controlled in the state of Indiana on July 7th,
    2018.” (Tr. Vol. II at 112.) The court took judicial notice of the statute
    authorizing state agencies to adopt emergency rules and the Indiana Board of
    Pharmacy emergency rule classifying Fluoro ADB as a controlled substance.
    [7]   Flynn testified at trial and admitted purchasing Suboxone and cigarettes from
    Craig Green. He denied giving “Tune” to anyone at the jail or asking anyone
    to bring “Tune” into the jail. (Id. at 123-24.) Flynn testified that Green asked
    Flynn to take a package back to the pod with him on July 10, 2018, but Flynn
    refused. Flynn admitted passing notes for Green. Flynn’s counsel asked Flynn
    about the note found in his shoe:
    [Flynn’s Counsel:] And uh, so who got popped off that day?
    [Flynn:] Uh, I said—I did say we, but I was—I—talking to her, I
    was talking as a whole, the whole kitchen popped off, so I
    couldn’t help her out.
    (Id. at 127.) Flynn also testified that the square in the note referred to tobacco
    cigarettes.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1757 | February 21, 2020   Page 5 of 12
    [Flynn’s counsel:] Okay. So uh, next you wrote, I’m trying to get
    you something better. It’s going to be hard now though, my plug
    got popped off. What were you trying to get her that was better?
    [Flynn:] Just like, if she didn’t smoke squares or uh, pretty much
    like, I asked her what she wanted and I could try to get it for her
    and that’s what I was going to do.
    [Flynn’s counsel:] So it could have been Tune, it could have
    been Suboxone strips, it could have been a number of things?
    [Flynn:] It could have been anything, but I mean, I just told her I
    would try to get her something better if she wanted it.
    [Flynn’s counsel:] But then you said, it’s going to be hard now,
    my plug got popped off. What does that mean?
    [Flynn:] Uhm, cause I was getting the, the, the—like the person
    I was getting the stuff from most of the time, when he got—Craig
    or Money would have stuff and everybody got caught, so I
    couldn’t—I couldn’t get her nothing.
    (Id. at 129-130.) The court found Flynn guilty, and imposed a seven-year
    sentence, with five years executed in the Indiana Department of Correction and
    the remaining two years suspended to probation.
    Discussion and Decision
    1. The Charging Information and Fundamental Error
    [8]   Flynn argues the State’s failure to list the Indiana Board of Pharmacy
    emergency rule classifying Fluoro ADB as a controlled substance in either the
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1757 | February 21, 2020   Page 6 of 12
    charging information or the probable cause affidavit amounts to fundamental
    error because it compromised his ability to prepare a defense. Indiana Code
    section 35-34-1-4 provides that a defendant may move to dismiss an inadequate
    charging information no later than twenty days before the omnibus date. Flynn
    did not move to dismiss the charging information, and he acknowledges that
    the failure to timely challenge a defective charging information results in waiver
    of the challenge, unless the defect amounts to fundamental error. Hayden v.
    State, 
    19 N.E.3d 831
    , 841 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014), reh’g denied, trans. denied.
    [9]    As our Indiana Supreme Court has explained, “[t]he fundamental error
    exception is extremely narrow, and applies only when the error constitutes a
    blatant violation of basic principles, the harm or potential for harm is
    substantial, and the resulting error denied the defendant fundamental due
    process.” Brown v. State, 
    929 N.E.2d 204
    , 207 (Ind. 2010) (internal quotation
    marks omitted). The claimed error must be so egregious it renders a fair trial
    impossible or constitutes a blatant violation of basic and elementary principles
    of due process. 
    Id. An omission
    in the charging information constitutes
    fundamental error if it misleads the defendant or fails to give the defendant
    notice of the charges against him. Miller v. State, 
    634 N.E.2d 57
    , 61 (Ind. Ct.
    App. 1994).
    [10]   Flynn likens his case to Tiplick v. State, 
    43 N.E.3d 1259
    (Ind. 2015). In Tiplick,
    the defendant faced charges for possessing, selling, and dealing products
    containing the chemical compound XLR11 and moved to dismiss the charging
    information. 
    Id. at 1260-61.
    Synthetic cannabinoids are difficult to regulate
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1757 | February 21, 2020   Page 7 of 12
    because “minor variants in chemical structure can place the substances beyond
    the reach of criminal statutes without diminishing their psychotropic effects.”
    
    Id. at 1261.
    In 2012, the Indiana legislature amended the criminal code to re-
    define the term “synthetic drug” to encompass a variety of compounds and
    chemical analogs, “including ‘any compound determined to be a synthetic drug
    by rule adopted under IC 25-26-13-4.1.’” 
    Id. (quoting 2012
    Ind. Acts 1795-99).
    Indiana Code section 25-26-13-4.1 authorized the Indiana Board of Pharmacy
    to declare additional compounds to be synthetic drugs via emergency rule. 
    Id. At the
    time Tiplick was charged, XLR11 was classified as a synthetic drug via
    emergency rule. 
    Id. [11] Tiplick
    argued “the information was required to reference the Emergency Rule
    rather than just the criminal statute, because without it, there is nothing to
    indicate with specificity the criminality of XLR11.” 
    Id. at 1270.
    Our Indiana
    Supreme Court agreed and held that the charges related XLR11 must be
    dismissed, but the court noted the State could “re-file an amended information
    with proper reference to the Emergency Rule.” 
    Id. at 1270
    n.13. Initially, we
    note the different procedural posture between the case at bar and Tiplick. “The
    purpose of the charging information is to provide a defendant with notice of the
    crime of which he is charged so that he is able to prepare a defense.” State v.
    Laker, 
    939 N.E.2d 1111
    , 1113 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010), trans. denied. Tiplick
    challenged the adequacy of the charging information at the beginning of the
    litigation when he was still formulating a defense; whereas, Flynn challenges
    the charging information after he was tried and convicted.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1757 | February 21, 2020   Page 8 of 12
    [12]   Flynn knew the substance that he was alleged to have aided in trafficking and
    never contested the criminality of the substance. The probable cause affidavit
    identified Fluoro ADB as a controlled substance, even though it did not specify
    any statute or Indiana Board of Pharmacy emergency rule listing Fluoro ADB
    as a prohibited substance. The Indiana State Police Certificate of Analysis also
    identified Fluoro ADB as a controlled substance, and it listed the dates it was
    federally controlled and controlled in Indiana. Further, when the State asked
    the trial court to take judicial notice of the emergency rule, the deputy
    prosecutor noted that he had spoken with Flynn’s counsel before offering the
    exhibit. Therefore, the failure of the charging information and the probable
    cause affidavit to list the emergency rule classifying Fluoro ADB as a controlled
    substance does not amount to fundamental error. See Leggs v. State, 
    966 N.E.2d 204
    , 208 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (holding failure of charging information to allege
    defendant acted with intent that the victim be put in fear was not fundamental
    error).
    2. Sufficiency of the Evidence
    [13]   When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, we
    look only to the probative evidence and the reasonable inferences supporting
    the verdict. Drane v. State, 
    867 N.E.2d 144
    , 146 (Ind. 2007). The evidence does
    not need to overcome every hypothesis of innocence. 
    Id. at 147.
    We do not
    reweigh the evidence; nor do we assess the credibility of the witnesses. Stokes v.
    State, 
    801 N.E.2d 1263
    , 1271 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004), trans. denied. “The
    conviction will be affirmed if there is substantial evidence of probative value to
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1757 | February 21, 2020   Page 9 of 12
    support the conclusion of the trier of fact.” 
    Id. “A verdict
    may be sustained
    based on circumstantial evidence alone if that circumstantial evidence supports
    a reasonable inference of guilt.” Maul v. State, 
    731 N.E.2d 438
    , 439 (Ind. 2000).
    Also, the testimony of a single eyewitness is enough to sustain a conviction.
    Emerson v. State, 
    724 N.E.2d 605
    , 609-10 (Ind. 2000), reh’g denied. “It is for the
    trier of fact to resolve conflicts in the evidence and to decide which witnesses to
    believe or disbelieve.” Ferrell v. State, 
    746 N.E.2d 48
    , 51 (Ind. 2001). We will
    reverse “only when no reasonable fact-finder could find the elements of the
    crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt.” McMiller v. State, 
    90 N.E.3d 672
    ,
    675 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017).
    [14]   A person who aids, induces, or causes another to commit an offense is also
    guilty of the offense. Ind. Code § 35-41-2-4. “Under the theory of accomplice
    liability, ‘an accomplice is criminally responsible for all acts committed by a
    confederate which are a probable and natural consequence’ of their concerted
    action.” Porter v. State, 
    715 N.E.2d 868
    , 870 (Ind. 1999) (quoting McGee v. State,
    
    699 N.E.2d 264
    , 265 (Ind. 1998)). The State does not need to prove “the
    accomplice personally participated in the commission of each element of the
    offense.” Anthony v. State, 
    56 N.E.3d 705
    , 714 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016), trans.
    denied. Flynn argues the State presented insufficient evidence to support his
    conviction. He contends the State presented no evidence linking him to James
    Woodard or linking James Woodard to Craig Green. He argues he merely
    purchased tobacco and Suboxone but denies trafficking as charged.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1757 | February 21, 2020   Page 10 of 12
    [15]   Nonetheless, trafficking into the jail did occur because officers found Woodard
    in possession of Fluoro ADB. Flynn knew about trafficking into the kitchen
    and identified the civilian kitchen worker involved. The jail did not authorize
    inmates to possess tobacco, and Flynn had tobacco on his person and in his
    possessions. He also acknowledged passing notes on behalf of Green because
    Green did not want to get caught passing notes to other inmates. Further,
    Flynn made incriminating statements in the note found in his shoe. For
    example, he said, “we got popped off yesterday. Lost an ounce of Toon + 30
    strips.” (State Ex. 2.) He promised the intended recipient of the note
    “somethin[g] better…Soon as I touch it[.]” (Id.) Flynn also stated his “plug got
    popped off.” (Id.)
    [16]   Flynn offered explanations for these statements in his testimony. For example,
    he said the “we” referred to the kitchen staff. (Tr. Vol. II at 127.) He denied
    giving tune to anyone at the jail or asking anyone to bring tune into the jail. He
    said the note was his way of trying to get to know the intended recipient and
    impress her. However, the factfinder was not required to believe Flynn’s
    explanations. See Graves v. State, 
    472 N.E.2d 190
    , 191 (Ind. 1984) (“In a case of
    conflicting evidence, the trier of fact is not obliged to believe the testimony of
    the defendant or any other particular witness. It is the prerogative of the jury to
    weigh the evidence and to determine who, in fact, is telling the truth.”).
    [17]   The trier of fact could easily infer that Flynn’s statements in the note
    demonstrate Flynn’s involvement in trafficking and an offer to supply the
    female inmate with tune when the substance became available. We will not
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1757 | February 21, 2020   Page 11 of 12
    second guess the credibility determinations of the trier of fact. McElfresh v. State,
    
    51 N.E.3d 103
    , 111 (Ind. 2016). Given the evidence linking Flynn to aiding in
    trafficking, a reasonable trier of fact could conclude Flynn was guilty beyond a
    reasonable doubt. See Crittendon v. State, 
    106 N.E.3d 1100
    , 1103 (Ind. Ct. App.
    2018) (holding sufficient evidence supported conviction for possession of
    narcotic drug when defendant admitted using heroin and showed signs of
    heroin overdose).
    Conclusion
    [18]   While the charging information and the probable cause affidavit were flawed
    because they failed to reference the Indiana Board of Pharmacy’s emergency
    rule listing Fluoro ADB as a prohibited substance, such flaw does not amount
    to fundamental error. Further, there was sufficient evidence to affirm Flynn’s
    conviction. Accordingly, we affirm.
    [19]   Affirmed.
    Crone, J., and Pyle, J., concur.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1757 | February 21, 2020   Page 12 of 12