author: Bailey, Judge.

text:
    Chad Thomas BURNELL, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 29A02-1710-CR-2374
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed September 14, 2018
    Attorney for Appellant: James R. Recker, Indianapolis, Indiana
    Attorneys for Appellee: Curtis T. Hill, Jr., Attorney General of Indiana, Lee M. Stoy, Jr., Deputy Attorney General, Indianapolis, Indiana
   Bailey, Judge.

Case Summary

[1] Chad T. Burnell ("Burnell") challenges his conviction, following a jury trial, of operating a vehicle while intoxicated, as a Level 6 felony, and his status as a habitual vehicular substance offender. He raises eight issues on appeal, which we consolidate and restate as: whether Burnell's trial counsel was ineffective.

[2] We affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

[3] At around 12:30 a.m. on November 24, 2016, Hamilton County Sheriff's Deputy Jason Cramer ("Dep. Cramer") saw a vehicle driven by Burnell weave abruptly within its lane and cross the center line. Dep. Cramer activated his in-car camera and his emergency lights to conduct a traffic stop. Soon after Burnell pulled over, Dep. Cramer approached the vehicle and explained to Burnell that he had been stopped because he "went left of center." Tr. Vol. II at 201. Dep. Cramer could smell the odor of an alcoholic beverage coming from inside the vehicle. Dep. Cramer asked Burnell if he had been drinking, and Burnell stated that he had consumed three alcoholic beverages. Dep. Cramer then asked Burnell if he had his driver's license on him and if it was valid. Burnell told Dep. Cramer that he did not have his license with him and that, as far as he knew, his license was valid.

[4] After noticing a knife in the back seat of Burnell's vehicle, Dep. Cramer asked Burnell to step out of the vehicle. Dep. Cramer asked a backup officer to pull the passenger out of the vehicle and make sure he did not have any weapons. When Burnell stepped out of the vehicle, Dep. Cramer conducted a pat down search for other weapons and found a knife in Burnell's pocket. After securing the knives, Dep. Cramer went back to his patrol car and discovered that Burnell's driver's license was suspended. Dep. Cramer came back to Burnell and asked if Burnell knew that his license was suspended. Burnell did not answer. Dep. Cramer then requested permission to search the car, and Burnell consented.

[5] After searching the vehicle, Dep. Cramer performed a horizontal gaze nystagmus test on Burnell. Burnell exhibited six out of six clues and failed the test. Dep. Cramer did not conduct any more field sobriety tests on Burnell, because Burnell stated that he had nerve damage in his legs. Burnell subsequently agreed to take a breathalyzer; however, after three attempts, Burnell was unable to give a sufficient sample for the breathalyzer. Therefore, Dep. Cramer sought and obtained Burnell's consent to conduct a blood test, the results of which showed that Burnell had a blood alcohol concentration of 0.119 grams of alcohol per 100 milliliters of his blood.

[6] On December 5, 2016, the State charged Burnell as follows: Count I, operating a vehicle while intoxicated, as a Class A misdemeanor; Count II, operating a vehicle with an alcohol concentration of .08 or more, as a Class C misdemeanor; Count III, operating a vehicle while intoxicated, as a Level 6 felony; Count IV, operating a vehicle with an alcohol concentration of .08 or more, as a Level 6 felony; and Count V, driving while suspended, as a Class A misdemeanor. The State also alleged that Burnell was a habitual vehicular substance offender.

[7] At Burnell's September 19, 2017, jury trial, Dep. Cramer testified that when he approached Burnell he could smell the odor of an alcoholic beverage coming from the vehicle, that Burnell's speech was slurred and thick, and that Burnell's eyes were red, watery, and glassy. Dep. Cramer stated that he had to remind Burnell to place his vehicle in park when he asked Burnell to exit the vehicle and that Burnell failed the horizontal gaze nystagmus test. The toxicology results were also admitted into evidence. State's Ex. 5.

[8] The jury found Burnell guilty of operating a vehicle while intoxicated as a Class A misdemeanor and operating a vehicle with an alcohol concentration of .08 or more as a Class C misdemeanor. Burnell elected to forgo the enhancement phase of trial and admit his prior convictions alleged in count III for the purposes of elevating the Class A misdemeanor to a Level 6 felony and the habitual vehicular substance offender enhancement. The trial court merged counts I and II with count III. On October 6, 2017, the trial court sentenced Burnell to two and a half years for operating a vehicle while intoxicated as a Level 6 felony, enhanced by an additional three years for being a habitual vehicular substance offender. Burnell now appeals.

Discussion and Decision

[9] Burnell contends that his trial counsel was ineffective. As our Supreme Court has noted:

[t]his Court reviews claims of ineffective assistance of counsel under the two components set forth in Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). First, the defendant must show that counsel's performance was deficient. Id. at 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052. This requires a showing that counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, id. at 688, 104 S.Ct. 2052, and that the errors were so serious that they resulted in a denial of the right to counsel guaranteed the defendant by the Sixth Amendment, id. at 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052. Second, the defendant must show that the deficient performance prejudiced the defendant. Id. To establish prejudice, a defendant must show that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. Id. at 694, 104 S.Ct. 2052. A reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome. Id.

Wentz v. State , 766 N.E.2d 351, 360 (Ind. 2002). We will not second-guess trial counsel's strategy and tactics unless they are so unreasonable that they fall outside objective standards. See, e.g. , Benefield v. State , 945 N.E.2d 791, 797 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011). Isolated mistakes, poor strategy, inexperience, and instances of bad judgment do not necessarily render representation ineffective. Wentz , 766 N.E.2d at 361. And if we can dispose of a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel by analyzing the prejudice prong alone, we will do so. Benefield , 945 N.E.2d at 797 (citing Wentz , 766 N.E.2d at 360 ).

[10] However, we do not reach the merits of seven of Burnell's eight ineffective assistance of counsel contentions because he has waived them by failing to make cogent argument and citation to legal authority as required by Indiana Appellate Rule 46(A)(8). That rule requires that each contention made in the argument section of an appellant's brief "must be supported by citations to the authorities, statutes, and the Appendix or parts of the Record on Appeal relied on." Ind. Appellate Rule 46(A)(8). This means that an appellant's argument section must contain

a clear presentation of appellant's contentions with respect to the issues presented, the reasons in support of the contentions with any applicable citation to authorities, statutes, and parts of the record relied upon, and a clear showing of how the issues and contentions relate to particular facts of the case under review.

Dortch v. Lugar , 255 Ind. 545, 266 N.E.2d 25, 44 (1971) (explaining former Appellate Rule 8.3, the precursor to current Rule 46 ), abrogated on other grounds by Collins v. Day , 644 N.E.2d 72 (Ind. 1994). We will not review undeveloped arguments, for "a court which must search the record and make up its own arguments because a party has presented them in perfunctory form runs the risk of being an advocate rather than an adjudicator." Keller v. State , 549 N.E.2d 372, 373 (Ind. 1990). Thus, "[i]t is not sufficient for the argument section that an appellant simply recites facts and makes conclusory statements without analysis or authoritative support." Kishpaugh v. Odegard , 17 N.E.3d 363, 373 n.3 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014).

[11] Burnell contends that his trial counsel was ineffective in eight separate ways, but he fails to provide cogent reasoning or authority to support any contention except his third. His second and seventh contentions are each only one sentence long-and incomplete sentences at that-with no citation to legal authority or the record. Where Burnell does cite to the record for the seven contentions, his citations are either irrelevant or support the opposite of what he contends. Burnell only cites legal authority for contentions five and six and, even then, fails to state how the case law applies to the facts of this case. Although Burnell summarizes the Strickland analysis, he fails to state how that analysis applies to any of the seven alleged errors of his trial counsel or how he was prejudiced in any way by those alleged errors. Instead, Burnell makes only conclusory and/or speculative statements. Because Burnell has failed to meet the requirements of Indiana Appellate Rule 46(A)(8) as to seven of his eight contentions, he has waived our review of them.

[12] Burnell does provide very brief argument and citation to the record for his contention number three-his assertion that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to interview a police officer from another agency who had an interaction with Burnell approximately half an hour before Dep. Cramer pulled Burnell over. In support of this assertion, Burnell cites to his statement to the court at his August 31, 2017 final pre-trial conference. At that time, Burnell informed the court, in the presence of his counsel, of his prior interaction that night with a Sheridan police officer. Burnell contends that his trial counsel should have deposed the Sheridan officer about his observations of Burnell that night because "the logical conclusion [is] that [Burnell] was not intoxicated to the point that it gave that officer any concern shortly before the subsequent later stop [by Dep. Cramer]." Appellant's Br. at 9-10.

[13] Even assuming-without deciding-that Burnell's trial counsel's failure to interview or depose the Sheridan police officer was so unreasonable that it fell outside objective standards, Burnell has failed to show the prejudice prong of the Strickland analysis. That is, Burnell has failed to show a reasonable probability that, but for his counsel's error, the result of his trial would have been different. Wentz , 766 N.E.2d at 360. Rather, even if the Sheridan police officer had testified that Burnell did not seem to him to be intoxicated earlier that evening, there was overwhelming other evidence that Burnell was, in fact, intoxicated. The evidence showed that his blood alcohol concentration was 0.119 grams of alcohol per 100 milliliters of his blood, which was well above the legal limit. I.C. § 9-30-5-1(a)(1) (providing the legal limit is 0.07 grams). Dep. Cramer testified that when he approached Burnell he could smell the odor of an alcoholic beverage coming from the vehicle, that Burnell's speech was slurred and thick, and that Burnell's eyes were red, watery, and glassy. In addition, Dep. Cramer testified that he had to remind Burnell to place his vehicle in park when he asked Burnell to exit the vehicle and that Burnell failed the horizontal gaze nystagmus test. Thus, we cannot say that, but for trial counsel's failure to interview or depose the Sheridan police officer, the result of Burnell's trial would have been different.

Conclusion

[14] Burnell has waived seven of the eight contentions he raises on appeal by failing to provide cogent argument and citation to legal authority in compliance with Indiana Appellate Rule 46(A)(8). And, while Burnell may have provided the minimum amount of reasoning and citation to authority required as to his contention that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to depose the Sheridan police officer, he failed to show how his trial counsel's error prejudiced him, given the overwhelming evidence of his intoxication.

[15] Affirmed.

Mathias, J., and Bradford, J., concur.

      Ind. Code § 9-30-5-2 and I.C. § 9-30-5-3(a)(1).

      I.C. § 9-30-15.5-2.

      I.C. § 9-30-5-2.

      I.C. § 9-30-5-1(a)(1).

      I.C. § 9-30-5-1(a) and I.C. § 9-30-5-3(a)(1).

      I.C. § 9-24-19-3(a).

      His assertions on appeal are that his trial counsel was ineffective by: (1) failing to object to the admission of the video of Dep. Cramer's in-car camera; (2) failure to interview or depose the passenger in Burnell's car; (3) failure to interview or depose a different police officer with whom Burnell had interacted earlier that same evening; (4) failure to challenge the blood draw report; (5) failure to raise a challenge under Pirtle v. State , 263 Ind. 16, 323 N.E.2d 634 (1975) ; (6) failure to raise the failure to give Miranda warnings; (7) failure to challenge the results of the breath test; and (8) failure to investigate the underlying convictions that were the basis for his elevated sentence and habitual substance offender enhancement. Appellant's Br. at 9-11.

      In fact, much of Burnell's brief consists of incomplete sentences and other grammatical errors, making it difficult to even ascertain what his contentions are.

      For example, Burnell maintains that his trial counsel was ineffective for "[f]ailure to note the blood draw report with a footnote that box containing the sample had been opened...," but then he cites to portions of the record showing that the box containing the blood samples were, in fact, sealed when received by the lab. Appellant's Br. at 10; App. Vol. III at 21-22.

      For example, Burnell claims his counsel was ineffective for failing "to raise a challenge pursuant to Pirtle v. State , [263 Ind. 16, 323 N.E.2d 634 (Ind. 1975) ]," but he fails to state how Pirtle is applicable to his case or how the lack of a Pirtle challenge prejudiced him. Appellant's Br. at 10.

      We note that contention number three is also based on speculation-i.e., that the Sheridan police officer would have testified that he observed Burnell closely enough that evening to form an impression and that he did not believe Burnell was intoxicated.


source: Caselaw Access Project

author: Crone, Judge.

license: Public Domain

text:
    J.S., Appellant-Respondent, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Petitioner
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JV-1049
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED October 12, 2018
    Attorney for Appellant: Amy Karozos, Greenwood, Indiana
    Attorneys for Appellee: Curtis T. Hill, Jr., Attorney General, Ellen H. Meilaender, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, Indianapolis, Indiana
   Crone, Judge.

Case Summary

[1] J.S. appeals his placement in the Indiana Department of Correction ("DOC") following his admission to delinquent acts that would have amounted to level 6 felony receiving stolen auto parts, class A misdemeanor dangerous possession of a firearm, and class A misdemeanor theft if committed by an adult. Finding that the trial court acted within its discretion in ordering J.S.'s placement in the DOC, we affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

[2] In 2017, fifteen-year-old J.S. lived with his mother in an Indianapolis apartment. He had a history of disciplinary incidents at school, generally involving fighting and resulting in suspension. He also used marijuana. On October 7, 2017, he attended a party at which firearms were present. Eyewitnesses reported seeing him fire gunshots into the air. A week later, police discovered J.S. sleeping in the front seat of a vehicle identified as one recently stolen in an armed carjacking. He told police that he knew that the vehicle had been stolen and that he and two friends had driven it around, parked it, and fallen asleep. He reported that he had won the vehicle in a dice game, but also said that it had been given to him. Police discovered a loaded handgun in plain view in the front passenger's side floor area. On October 18, 2017, under cause number 49D09-1710-JD-1472 ("Cause 1472"), the State filed a petition alleging that J.S. had committed acts amounting to level 6 felony receiving stolen auto parts and class A misdemeanor criminal trespass if committed by an adult. J.S. was placed on electronic monitoring pending his adjudication.

[3] Three weeks later, police responded to a report of an armed robbery involving two armed juvenile boys who stole a woman's purse, cell phone, and car keys and fled on foot to a nearby apartment. According to a predispositional report filed by the local probation department, a maintenance man observed the boys as they ran and identified one of the boys as J.S. J.S. said that he was inside his apartment when the boys (his friends) asked to enter. He allowed them to enter and stash a firearm and other contraband inside the apartment. Police recovered the firearm from his bedroom, and ballistics testing showed a match with bullet casings found at the scene of the October 7 party. Under cause number 49D09-1711-JD-1623 ("Cause 1623"), the State filed a petition alleging that J.S. had committed acts amounting to level 3 felony armed robbery, level 6 felony pointing a firearm, class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license, and class A misdemeanor theft if committed by an adult. The State also filed a notice of electronic monitoring violation, based on J.S.'s allowing individuals into his home and possessing a firearm.

[4] At the end of 2017, J.S.'s mother found an apartment in another school district and enrolled J.S. for classes beginning in January 2018. During January, J.S. was written up for skipping classes and received one disciplinary referral for disruption on the bus.

[5] In February 2018, under cause number 49D09-1802-JD-178 ("Cause 178"), stemming from the incident at the October 7 party, the State filed a petition alleging that J.S. had committed acts amounting to level 5 felony criminal recklessness, class A misdemeanor dangerous possession of a firearm, and class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license if committed by an adult. The State removed J.S. from his home and placed him in pretrial detention, during which time he accumulated several incident reports.

[6] J.S. entered into an admission agreement, pursuant to which he admitted to acts amounting to receiving stolen auto parts (Cause 1472), class A misdemeanor dangerous possession of a firearm (Cause 1623), and class A misdemeanor theft (Cause 1623) if committed by an adult. In exchange, the State agreed to dismiss the remaining counts in Causes 1472 and 1623 and all counts in Cause 178. The agreement specified that the disposition would be left open to the trial court's discretion, and the trial court ordered a psychological evaluation.

[7] At the dispositional hearing, the trial court admitted the psychologist's report, in which the doctor expressed concern with J.S.'s antisocial behavior, peer associations, possession of firearms, and drug abuse. He also considered J.S.'s risk of recidivism to be moderate to high. Notwithstanding, the doctor recommended that if the court were to return J.S. to the community, he should be afforded close supervision, electronic monitoring, drug abuse screening, and frequent assessment and oversight from the probation department. Appellant's App. Vol. 2 at 154. The public defender agency submitted a proposed plan for returning J.S. home with supervision from his mother, a neighbor, and a cousin and for court-ordered services, monitoring, and curfew. Id. at 135-36. The probation department submitted its predispositional report and testimony recommending that J.S. be placed in the DOC and be subject to a no-contact order concerning certain friends and victims. The trial court issued a dispositional order placing J.S. in the DOC. J.S. now appeals his disposition. Additional facts will be provided as necessary.

Discussion and Decision

[8] J.S. contends that the trial court abused its discretion in placing him in the DOC. The disposition of a juvenile adjudicated a delinquent is a matter committed to the trial court's discretion, subject to the statutory considerations of the child's welfare, community safety, and the policy favoring the least harsh disposition. R.H. v. State , 937 N.E.2d 386, 388 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). We review a trial court's disposition for an abuse of discretion, which occurs if its decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before it or the reasonable inferences that may be drawn therefrom. Id. In determining whether a trial court has abused its discretion, we neither reweigh evidence nor judge witness credibility. Ripps v. State , 968 N.E.2d 323, 326 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012).

[9] Juvenile court proceedings are civil, not criminal, in nature. T.K. v. State , 899 N.E.2d 686, 687-88 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009). "[T]he goal of the juvenile process is rehabilitation so that the youth will not become a criminal as an adult." R.H., 937 N.E.2d at 388. As such, juvenile courts have a variety of placement choices. Id. Indiana Code Section 31-37-18-6 reads,

If consistent with the safety of the community and the best interest of the child, the juvenile court shall enter a dispositional decree that:
(1) is:
(A) in the least restrictive (most family like) and most appropriate setting available; and
(B) close to the parents' home, consistent with the best interest and special needs of the child;
(2) least interferes with family autonomy;
(3) is least disruptive of family life;
(4) imposes the least restraint on the freedom of the child and the child's parent, guardian, or custodian; and
(5) provides a reasonable opportunity for participation by the child's parent, guardian, or custodian.

[10] Indiana Code Section 31-37-18-9(a)(5) requires the trial court to state its reasons for the disposition chosen. This involves the trial court's issuance of written findings and conclusions concerning the child's care, treatment, rehabilitation, or placement; parental participation in the plan; efforts made to prevent the child's removal from the parent; family services offered; and the court's reasons for its disposition. Ind. Code § 31-37-18-9(a)(1)-(5). Here, the trial court issued findings indicating its consideration of the statutory factors and its reasons for ordering placement in the DOC. These include the seriousness of the circumstances surrounding J.S.'s offenses, that J.S. was on electronic monitoring when he committed the offenses in Cause 1623, that he was deemed a moderate to high risk for continued delinquency recidivism, that he needs services that cannot be provided in the home, and that he had an onslaught of referrals, all of which were firearms-related. Appellant's App. Vol. 2 at 24-25.

[11] J.S. challenges the trial court's finding that "[a]ll three referrals before the court were firearms related." Id. at 25. He claims that the presence and/or involvement of a firearm was factually determined only as to Cause 1623, in which he confessed, as part of his admission agreement, to knowing that a firearm used in an armed robbery was present in his bedroom. He therefore maintains that the trial court could not properly consider the presence or involvement of a firearm in the remaining referrals against him. In addressing this argument, we first note that J.S. did not object when the prosecutor referenced his arrest in another case involving a gun while his first gun-related case was pending. Tr. Vol. 2 at 17-18. Nor did he object or seek a clarification when the trial court referenced his "culture of guns," his admission that he had driven the stolen vehicle with a handgun located under the seat, or the presence of guns at the October party in connection with his penchant for being around firearms. See id. at 23-24. Instead, he now appears to assert that when a trial court is considering placement options for a juvenile offender, it may not consider evidence beyond that which formed the factual basis for the juvenile's agreed admissions. We disagree.

[12] We find juvenile dispositional proceedings such as these to be analogous to sentencing hearings after an open plea agreement in adult court, where the trial court considers a broad range of information in evaluating aggravating and mitigating circumstances relevant to sentencing. In Bethea v. State , 983 N.E.2d 1134, 1144 (Ind. 2013), the defendant bargained for the dismissal of seven of the nine counts against him, and the plea agreement did not limit the evidence that the State or the defendant could offer as aggravating or mitigating factors during sentencing. In sentencing Bethea, the trial court cited as an aggravating factor the injury to the victim, where the injury was an element of a burglary charge dismissed pursuant to Bethea's plea agreement. Id. at 1142. Although Bethea involved a post-conviction claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, the claim involved counsel's allegedly deficient performance in failing to cogently challenge the trial court's consideration of aggravating factors pertaining to counts that were dismissed pursuant to Bethea's plea agreement. Id. at 1139, 1142. In analyzing the scope of information proper for consideration as aggravators and mitigators, the Bethea court explained that a plea agreement is a contract negotiated by the parties, and as such, the parties can agree to limit or otherwise exclude what may be considered by the trial court during sentencing. Id. at 1146. Unless the parties include language limiting the evidence that the trial court may consider during sentencing, the trial court may consider facts and circumstances surrounding the case, even those pertaining to underlying charges that were dismissed. Id. at 1144-45. The Bethea court held that the trial court did not err in giving significant consideration to the facts relating to dismissed charges. Id. at 1145.

[13] Similarly, here, J.S. and the State entered into an admission agreement, functionally analogous to a plea agreement, in which J.S.'s disposition/placement was left open to the trial court's discretion. See Appellant's App. Vol. 3 at 3-5. The agreement did not include any language limiting the information that the State or J.S. could offer as factors relevant to the trial court's determination regarding placement; rather, it simply limited the delinquent acts for which the court could enter true findings. We find Bethea instructive and conclude that the trial court could properly consider the overall narrative of the referrals against J.S. when evaluating what placement would best promote community safety and J.S.'s best interests. These narratives, memorialized and included in the probation department's predispositional report and incorporated by reference by the trial court, include eyewitness accounts of J.S. firing a handgun into the air at a party, a maintenance man's identification of J.S. as one of the boys running from the scene of an armed robbery with a black object in his hand, and officers' discovery of a handgun in plain view in a stolen vehicle which J.S. had admitted to driving. This information implicated public safety as well as J.S.'s best interests, and the trial court did not err in considering it.

[14] As evidence favoring family placement, J.S. cites his mother's proactive steps in moving him to a new high school during the pendency of the juvenile proceedings. The record shows that in his first month at his new school, J.S. had several disciplinary entries for skipping classes and an entry for disruption/disrespect on the bus. The court considered the positive steps taken by J.S.'s mother but ultimately found that the educational opportunities available within the DOC would offer a level of structure that would better promote J.S.'s educational interests. We see nothing wrong with this assessment.

[15] Finally, to the extent J.S. suggests that the trial court overlooked his lack of a prior juvenile record and thus failed to consider the least harsh disposition available, we disagree. The court specifically indicated its consideration of J.S.'s lack of criminal record but went on to note the factors that militated toward his placement in the DOC: three referrals in a month's time, each involving multiple counts and the presence of a firearm, his commission of the acts in Cause 1623 while serving home detention pending trial, and his violation of home detention rules by allowing friends in his home and having a firearm in his bedroom. J.S.'s failure to abide by his pretrial home detention conditions does not bode well for his long-term prospects of success in less restrictive placements. Based on the foregoing, we conclude that the trial court acted within its discretion in ordering J.S.'s placement in the DOC. Accordingly, we affirm.

[16] Affirmed.

Najam, J., and Pyle, J., concur.

      Thus, in the context of analyzing appellate counsel's performance, counsel could not be said to have performed deficiently on that basis. Bethea , 983 N.E.2d at 1146.


author: Baker, Judge.

text:
    In the MATTER OF the Termination of Parent Rights of: B.J. (Minor Child), and T.J. (Mother), Appellant-Respondent, v. The Indiana Department of Child Services, Appellee-Petitioner
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JT-1266
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed October 17, 2018
    Attorney for Appellant: John T. Wilson, Anderson, Indiana
    Attorneys for Appellee: Curtis T. Hill, Jr., Attorney General of Indiana, Robert J. Henke, Deputy Attorney General, Indianapolis, Indiana
   Baker, Judge.

[1] T.J. (Mother) appeals the trial court's order terminating her parent-child relationship with B.J. (Child). Mother argues that the trial court erred by denying her motion to continue the termination hearing based on DCS's failure to provide her with statutorily required notice of the hearing. We find that DCS failed to comply with the statute but that the trial court acted within its discretion in denying the motion to continue. Therefore, we affirm.

Facts

[2] In December 2014, Child was found to be a Child In Need of Services (CHINS) after Child's sibling, G.K., sustained "extensive contusions and bleeding in the brain" that were allegedly caused by Mother. Tr. DCS Ex. 2 p. 2. Mother eventually pleaded guilty to criminal charges stemming from G.K.'s injuries and was sentenced to the Department of Correction (DOC).

[3] On February 20, 2017, DCS filed a petition to terminate the parent-child relationship between Child and Mother. The trial court set a factfinding date of June 6, 2017. DCS filed a motion to continue, which the trial court granted, resetting the hearing for November 7, 2017. On October 30, 2017, Mother's attorney filed a motion to continue the factfinding hearing because Mother was scheduled to be released from the DOC on November 1, 2017, and wished to have more time to improve her parent-child relationship before the factfinding. On October 31, 2017, the trial court granted the motion and continued the hearing to January 30, 2018. On November 1, 2017, the trial court sent notice of the new hearing date to Mother's last known address, which was the DOC facility where she had been incarcerated.

[4] After being released from the DOC on November 1, 2017, Mother failed to maintain consistent contact with DCS. She had some brief contacts with her Family Case Manager (FCM) shortly after she was released, but at the time of the termination hearing, the last contact of any sort was a text message to the FCM on December 5, 2017. She did not provide DCS with her new address and the FCM was under the impression that she was aware of the progress of the case and of the hearing scheduled for January 30, 2018.

[5] On January 29, 2018, Mother's attorney filed a motion to continue the factfinding hearing, arguing that DCS had not provided sufficient notice to Mother of the hearing. On January 30, 2018, Mother failed to appear at the hearing. The trial court heard argument on the motion to continue, denied it, and proceeded with the factfinding hearing. On April 26, 2018, the trial court entered an order granting the termination petition. In relevant part, it found as follows:

On 10/30/17, Mother, by her appointed counsel, filed a motion to continue the termination proceedings, asserting that Mother's incarceration was ended and that she deserved further opportunity to preserve her parent-child relationship with the Child. The Court granted this Motion made by Mother on 10/31/17 and reset the matter for trial on 1/30/18, with notice provided to all parties of the new hearing date obtained at Mother's request. During the termination hearing, the Court's staff verified that the Court's own file noted that notice of the new trial date of 1/30/2018 had been sent to Mother at her Department of Corrections facility address after the Court had granted her own motion to continue the previous trial setting.

Appealed Order p. 4. Mother now appeals.

Discussion and Decision

[6] Mother's sole argument on appeal is that DCS failed to give her statutorily required notice of the factfinding hearing and that as a result, her due process rights were violated when the trial court denied her motion to continue.

[7] The decision to grant or deny a motion to continue is within the trial court's sound discretion, and we will reverse only where the trial court reaches a conclusion that is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts or the reasonable and probable deductions that may be drawn therefrom. J.P. v. G.M. , 14 N.E.3d 786, 789 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014). To the extent that this appeal requires us to interpret a statute, we note that we apply a de novo standard of review to matters of statutory interpretation. In re Bi.B. , 69 N.E.3d 464, 466 (Ind. 2017).

[8] Indiana Code section 31-35-2-6.5 provides, in relevant part, as follows:

(a) This section applies to hearings under [the termination of parental rights] chapter relating to a child in need of services.
(b) At least ten (10) days before a hearing on a petition or motion under this chapter:
(1) the person or entity who filed the petition to terminate the parent-child relationship under section 4 of [the termination of parental rights] chapter; ...
shall send notice of the review to the persons listed in subsections (c) and (d).
(c) Except as provided in subsection (h), the following persons shall receive notice of a hearing on a petition or motion filed under this chapter:
(1) The child's parent, guardian, or custodian.
* * *
(e) The court shall provide to a person described in subsection (c) or (d) an opportunity to be heard and make recommendations to the court at the hearing....

[9] There is no evidence in the record that DCS provided notice of the January 2018 factfinding hearing to Mother. We must determine first, whether such notice was required; and second, whether, if required, the lack of notice entitles Mother to relief.

[10] First, the plain language of the statute clearly requires that DCS provide notice of a termination hearing to a child's parent at least ten days before the hearing. See In re H.K. , 971 N.E.2d 100, 103 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (holding that while formal service of process is not required, DCS is required to send notice of a termination hearing to the parent's last known address at least ten days before the hearing). Here, that did not occur. We strongly encourage DCS to comply with the notice requirements of Indiana Code section 31-35-2-6.5 in the future, especially given its recent struggles with due process compliance. See A.A. v. Ind. Dep't of Child Servs. , 100 N.E.3d 708, 708-09 (Ind. Ct. App. 2018) (order condemning the "repeated, significant violations of due process occurring in termination of parental rights cases throughout this state" and formally admonishing "DCS for its failure to afford litigants throughout this state the due process rights they are owed").

[11] That said, we must still determine whether the lack of such notice in this case entitles Mother to relief. Initially, we note that the statute does not contain a remedy for the failure to provide a parent with notice of a hearing. It does, however, state that the trial court "shall continue the hearing if, at the time of the hearing, the department has not provided the court with signed verification from the foster parent" that the foster parent received notice. I.C. § 31-35-2-6.5(f). The statute contains no such continuance requirement with respect to the child's parent. We interpret that to mean that the legislature left it to the trial court to determine, in its discretion, whether a continuance is warranted if DCS failed to provide this statutorily required notice.

[12] In this case, the termination hearing was continued, at Mother's own request , from November 7, 2017, to January 30, 2018. The trial court sent Mother notice of the new hearing date at her last known address, which was the DOC facility where she had been incarcerated. She apparently did not receive the notice because she was released from the DOC on or about November 1, 2017, which is the same date on which the trial court sent her the order. But after leaving the DOC, Mother failed to maintain consistent, substantive communication with DCS, and she did not provide DCS, her attorney, or the trial court with a current address. Therefore, even if DCS had attempted to provide the required notice, it, too, would have had to send it to her last-known address-which was the DOC facility. In other words, Mother was not prejudiced as a result of DCS's failure to provide her with the required notice-she would have been no better off had DCS done so.

[13] Under these circumstances, we find that the trial court did not err by denying Mother's motion to continue the termination hearing. We likewise find that the procedural irregularity did not violate Mother's due process rights under the specific facts of this case because the original hearing date was continued at her own request and she failed to provide current contact information after being released from the DOC. See In re T.W. , 831 N.E.2d 1242, 1247 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (holding that a procedural irregularity is not automatically a violation of a parent's due process rights).

[14] The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

May, J., and Robb, J., concur.

      G.K. is not a party to this case.

      DCS argues that the statute "does not say that the 10-day notice cannot be provided [to] the parent by the court, in lieu of DCS." Appellee's Br. p. 27. We are not persuaded by this analysis, as the statute quite plainly and clearly requires that the party that filed the termination petition-which will nearly always be DCS-is required to provide this notice. The statute contains no provision permitting another person or entity to provide the notice in DCS's stead.


author: BRADFORD, J.

text:
    In the MATTER OF the Involuntary Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: J.C. (Minor Child), and J.M.C. (Father), Appellant-Respondent, v. Indiana Department of Child Services, Appellee-Petitioner.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JT-536
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed July 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BRADFORD, J.

Affirmed.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.


author: MATHIAS, J.

text:
    Tyrone GRAYSON, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 49A04-1709-PC-2302
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed July 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   MATHIAS, J.

Affirmed.

RILEY, J., Concurs.

MAY, J., Concurs.


text:
    Robert L. KIRBY, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-342
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED July 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BRADFORD, J.

Affirmed.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.


text:
    Dennis KNIGHT, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 71A04-1711-PC-2748
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED July 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   MATHIAS, J.

Affirmed.

RILEY, J., Concurs.

MAY, J., Concurs.


text:
    Nico ROSS, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 04A03-1707-IF-1724
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED July 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   MATHIAS, J.

Affirmed.

RILEY, J., Concurs.

MAY, J., Concurs.


text:
    Kevin James RENT, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 49A04-1712-CR-2914
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed July 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BRADFORD, J.

Affirmed.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.


author: BAILEY, J.

text:
    Anthony CHANDLER, Appellant-Petitioner, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Respondent.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 67A01-1706-MI-1481
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED July 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAILEY, J.

Affirmed.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.


text:
    Cornelius L. THOMAS, Appellant-Respondent, v. Amber P. HALL, Appellee-Petitioner.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-DR-216
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED July 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   MATHIAS, J.

Affirmed.

RILEY, J., Concurs.

MAY, J., Concurs.


text:
    Crystal SELLS, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 48A02-1704-CR-927
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED July 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BRADFORD, J.

Affirmed.

BAKER, J., Concurs.

KIRSCH, J., Concurs.


author: PYLE, J.

text:
    Litale Zavier KENDALL, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 49A02-1708-CR-1717
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED July 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   PYLE, J.

Affirmed.

KIRSCH, J., Concurs.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.


text:
    David G. PIKE, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-205
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed July 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   PYLE, J.

Affirmed.

VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

BARNES, Sr.J., Concurs.


text:
    Luis C. SCHLEIFFER, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 35A02-1712-CR-2885
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed July 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   PYLE, J.

Affirmed.

VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

BARNES, Sr.J., Concurs.


text:
    Justin M. LOWER, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 46A03-1610-CR-2430
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed July 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   PYLE, J.

Affirmed.

KIRSCH, J., Concurs.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.


author: ALTICE, J.

text:
    Conor P. SCOTT, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-185
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed July 31, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   ALTICE, J.

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., Concurs.

ROBB, J., Concurs.


text:
    IN RE the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of K.H. and J.H. (Minor Children);
    T.B. (Mother) and J.H. (Father), Appellants-Respondents, v. The Indiana Department of Child Services, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 17A-JT-3047
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED July 31, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   PYLE, J.

Affirmed.

VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

BARNES, Sr.J., Concurs.


author: ROBB, J.

text:
    IN RE The Matter of D.G. (Minor Child):
    J.E. (Mother), Appellant-Respondent, v. N.G. (Father), Appellee-Respondent, and The Indiana Department of Child Services, Appellee-Petitioner.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JC-156
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED July 31, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   ROBB, J.

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., Concurs.

ALTICE, J., Concurs.


author: CRONE, J.

text:
    Juan DUARTE-LOPEZ, Appellant-Defendant/Cross-Appellee, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff/Cross-Appellant
    Court of Appeals Case No. 20A04-1712-CR-2897
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed July 31, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   CRONE, J.

Dismissed.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

BROWN, J., Concurs.


author: KIRSCH, J.

text:
    IN RE the PATERNITY OF Y.S.G.,
    David M. Grimes, Appellant-Petitioner, v. Brooklynn A. Ross, Appellee-Respondent.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JP-161
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED July 31, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   KIRSCH, J.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.

BAKER, J., Dissents in part with separate opinion.


text:
    Tracy M. INMAN, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 78A01-1711-CR-2596
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed July 31, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   CRONE, J.

Affirmed.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

BROWN, J., Concurs.


text:
    James E. JONES, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-26
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED July 31, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAILEY, J.

Affirmed.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.


text:
    Ross M. JORDAN, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-903
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed July 31, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BRADFORD, J.

Affirmed.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.


author: VAIDIK, C.J.

text:
    Aaron L. DALTON, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-776
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed July 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   VAIDIK, C.J.

Affirmed.

RILEY, J., Concurs.

KIRSCH, J., Concurs.


text:
    Shavaun INGRAM, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-217
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED July 31, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   PYLE, J.

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., Concurs.

CRONE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Duane Lamar HERRON, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 71A03-1712-CR-2798
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed July 31, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   ALTICE, J.

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., Concurs.

ROBB, J., Concurs.


text:
    Richard M. STATLER, Appellant/Cross-Appellee-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee/Cross-Appellant-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-182
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED July 31, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   KIRSCH, J.

Affirmed.

BAKER, J., Concurs.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.


text:
    Kawani DUKES, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-601
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED July 31, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAILEY, J.

Affirmed.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.


text:
    T.L., Appellant-Respondent, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Petitioner.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JV-250
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED July 31, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   ROBB, J.

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., Concurs.

ALTICE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Bruce MORGAN, Appellant-Petitioner, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Respondent.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 17A-PC-3062
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed July 31, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BRADFORD, J.

Affirmed.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.


author: BROWN, J.

text:
    Donald HOKE, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-500
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED July 31, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BROWN, J.

Affirmed.

RILEY, J., Concurs.

ALTICE, J., Concurs.


author: VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

text:
    John NEWSOME, Appellant-Plaintiff, v. Robert E. CARTER, Jr., Indiana Department of Correction, Officer Stephenson, and Indiana State Prison, Appellees-Defendants.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-SC-275
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 1, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
    BARNES, Sr.J.
    Affirmed.
   VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


author: BAKER, J.

text:
    James PARROTT, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 49A02-1712-CR-2761
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 1, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAKER, J.

Remanded with instructions.

MAY, J., Concurs.

ROBB, J., Concurs.


text:
    In the MATTER OF the PATERNITY OF T.A. (Minor Child):
    C.B., Appellant-Petitioner, v. L.A., Appellee-Respondent.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JP-238
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 1, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAILEY, J.

Affirmed.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.


author: BAILEY, J., Concurs.

text:
    Ed MCCARTHY, Appellant-Plaintiff, v. Tim (John) RALSTON, Appellee-Defendant.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 39A01-1711-PL-2717
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 1, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
    SHEPARD, Sr.J.
    Affirmed.
   BAILEY, J., Concurs.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.


text:
    Gregory B. KIMBROUGH, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-470
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 1, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAKER, J.

Affirmed.

MAY, J., Concurs.

ROBB, J., Concurs.


text:
    John C. GREEN, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-29
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 1, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAILEY, J.

Affirmed.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.


text:
    SAEGESSER ENGINEERING, INC., Appellant-Plaintiff, v. Terry AMICK, Appellee-Defendant.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 72A01-1711-PL-2660
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 1, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
    BARNES, Sr.J.
    Affirmed.
   VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Reginald BLACKBURN, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 71A03-1709-CR-2056
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 1, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
    BARNES, Sr.J.
    Affirmed.
   VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    In the MATTER OF the ADOPTION OF J.H., Minor Child,
    D.H., Appellant-Respondent, v. K.J. and B.J., Appellees-Petitioners.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-AD-454
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED July 31, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   KIRSCH, J.

Affirmed.

BAKER, J., Concurs.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.


text:
    Kayla OWENS, Appellant-Plaintiff, v. Amanda CAUDILLO and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., Appellees-Defendants.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 45A05-1712-CT-2934
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 2, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BRADFORD, J.

Affirmed.

KIRSCH, J., Concurs.

BAKER, J., Dissents with opinion.


text:
    Ricky J. THURSTON, Appellant-Petitioner, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Respondent.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 49A02-1710-PC-2279
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 2, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   ROBB, J.

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., Concurs.

ALTICE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Terry L. BALZ, Appellant-Defendant, v. CLAIMS PROFESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVES, LLC, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 10A04-1711-CT-2816
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 2, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
    BARNES, Sr.J.
    Affirmed.
   VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Jessica Sue PICHON, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-396
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 7, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   ALTICE, J.

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., Concurs.

ROBB, J., Dissents with opinion.


text:
    Mark A. EMERSON, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 48A02-1706-CR-1430
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 7, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   MATHIAS, J.

Affirmed.

RILEY, J., Concurs.

MAY, J., Concurs.


text:
    Andrea BROWN, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-30
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 6, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
    DARDEN, Sr.J.
    Affirmed.
   VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

MAY, J., Concurs.


text:
    Alia SIERRA, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 12A02-1710-CR-2339
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 6, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
    BARTEAU, Sr.J.
    Affirmed.
   BAILEY, J., Concurs.

ROBB, J., Concurs.


author: NAJAM, J.

text:
    Michael E. WISEHART, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 34A02-1711-CR-2599
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 3, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   NAJAM, J.

Affirmed.

CRONE, J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Jonathon Andrew MOORE, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-40
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 3, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
    DARDEN, Sr.J.
    Affirmed.
   BAILEY, J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Thomas N. HITE III, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 48A02-1712-CR-2947
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 2, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   VAIDIK, C.J.

Affirmed in part and remanded in part.

PYLE, J., Concurs.

BARNES, Sr.J., Concurs.


text:
    In re: The ADOPTION OF S.M.S.
    F.V., Appellant-Respondent, v. J.S. and A.S., Appellees-Petitioners.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-AD-517
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 2, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   ALTICE, J.

Affirmed.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

BROWN, J., Concurs.


text:
    Dectrick PRICE, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 49A02-1712-CR-2858
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 2, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
    BARNES, Sr.J.
    Affirmed.
   VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Ryan VANDEVENTER, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-445
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 8, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   KIRSCH, J.

Affirmed.

VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

RILEY, J., Concurs.


text:
    Keith A. SMITH, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 12A02-1711-CR-2820
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 7, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   MATHIAS, J.

Affirmed.

RILEY, J., Concurs.

MAY, J., Concurs.


text:
    Arnold E. BULMER, Appellant-Respondent, v. Pamela K. BULMER, Appellee-Petitioner.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-DR-55
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 7, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   MATHIAS, J.

Affirmed.

RILEY, J., Concurs.

MAY, J., Concurs.


text:
    In the MATTER OF the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of E.A.G. (Minor Child);
    C.L. (Mother) and A.G. (Father), Appellants-Respondents, v. Indiana Department of Child Services, Appellee-Petitioner.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JT-293
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 7, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   NAJAM, J.

Affirmed.

CRONE, J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Diamonte William BAKER, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 79A02-1711-CR-2640
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 7, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   CRONE, J.

Affirmed and remanded.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

BROWN, J., Concurs.


author: RILEY, J.

text:
    Caleb BIXLER, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Cause No. 49A04-1712-CR-2847
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 9, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   RILEY, J.

Affirmed.

MAY, J., Concurs.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.


text:
    Garrell "Gary" MCCUTCHEON Jr., and Melissa K. McCutcheon, Appellants-Plaintiffs, v. PAVCO TRUCKING CO. INC., and Titan Transfer, Inc., Appellees-Defendants.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 10A05-1711-PL-2713
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 9, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   ROBB, J.

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., Concurs.

ALTICE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Kristopher KANABLE, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-195
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 9, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   VAIDIK, C.J.

Affirmed in part, reversed and remanded in part.

PYLE, J., Concurs.

BARNES, Sr.J., Concurs.


text:
    In re the Marriage of: Jeffrey E. NELSON, Appellant-Respondent, v. Julie A. NELSON, Appellee-Petitioner.
    Court of Appeals Cause No. 18A-DR-794
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 9, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   RILEY, J.

Reversed.

MAY, J., Concurs.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.


text:
    Christopher DIXON, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-303
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 9, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAKER, J.

Affirmed.

MAY, J., Concurs.

ROBB, J., Concurs.


text:
    In the MATTER OF: D.K.M. and A.M. (Minor Children)
    A.D.M. (Mother), Appellant-Respondent, v. The Indiana Department of Child Services, Appellee-Petitioner.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JC-672
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 9, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   RILEY, J.

Affirmed.

VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

KIRSCH, J., Concurs.


text:
    David FREEMAN, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 49A02-1710-CR-2297
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 8, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   KIRSCH, J.

Affirmed.

VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

RILEY, J., Concurs.


text:
    In the MATTER OF the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of W.M., Legal Father, and K.M., Minor Child,
    W.M., Appellant-Respondent, v. Indiana Department of Child Services, Appellee-Petitioner.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JT-167
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 8, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   KIRSCH, J.

Affirmed.

VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

RILEY, J., Concurs.


text:
    Antonio T. COLLIER, Appellant-Petitioner, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Respondent.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 49A02-1710-PC-2325
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 8, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   NAJAM, J.

Affirmed.

CRONE, J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Charles A. PICKERING, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 71A03-1711-CR-2785
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 10, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   NAJAM, J.

Affirmed.

CRONE, J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    D.F., Appellant-Respondent, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Petitioner.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JV-610
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 10, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   NAJAM, J.

Affirmed.

CRONE, J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Sherry Vernell WEBB, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-507
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 10, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BROWN, J.

Affirmed.

VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

ALTICE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Steven EBLE, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-650
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 9, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   CRONE, J.

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Thomas REES, Appellant-Respondent, v. Judith REES, Appellee-Petitioner
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-DR-447
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 9, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAKER, J.

Affirmed and remanded.

MAY, J., Concurs.

ROBB, J., Concurs.


author: CRONE, J., Concurs.

text:
    Jason Charles JOHNSON, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 79A05-1711-CR-2766
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 15, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
    RUCKER, Sr.J.
    Affirmed.
   CRONE, J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Christopher VICOLI, Appellant/Cross-Appellee-Petitioner, v. Ashley MULLICA (Vicoli), Appellee/Cross-Appellant-Respondent.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 41A04-1711-DR-2624
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 14, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   KIRSCH, J.

Affirmed, reversed, and remanded.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.

BAKER, J., Concurs with separate opinion.


text:
    Jordan ALLEN-WILSON, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-201
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 14, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   VAIDIK, C.J.

Affirmed.

RILEY, J., Concurs.

KIRSCH, J., Concurs.


text:
    Linda SECHREST, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-628
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 14, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   KIRSCH, J.

Affirmed.

VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

RILEY, J., Concurs.


text:
    Dante FAULKNER, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-415
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 14, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   KIRSCH, J.

Affirmed.

VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

RILEY, J., Concurs.


author: MATHIAS, J., Concurs.

text:
    Mark B. HOWARD, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 49A04-1711-CR-2601
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 13, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
    BARTEAU, Sr.J.
    Affirmed.
   MATHIAS, J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Nicole KINGREY, Appellant-Petitioner, v. Michael KINGREY, Appellee-Respondent.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-DR-533
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 13, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   ROBB, J.

Affirmed.

BAKER, J., Concurs.

MAY, J., Concurs.


text:
    In the MATTER OF the Involuntary Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of E.S. and G.S. (Minor Children) and S.S. (Mother) and K.M. (Father), Appellants-Respondents, v. The Indiana Department of Child Services, Appellee-Petitioner
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JT-196
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 13, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   CRONE, J.

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Jeffery Thomas MAXWELL, Appellant-Petitioner, v. Shirley Sue MAXWELL, Appellee-Respondent.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 30A01-1712-DR-2768
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 10, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
    BARNES, Sr.J.
    Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
   VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Myles Kendall MCMAHAN, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Cause No. 17A-CR-3028
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 16, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   RILEY, J.

Affirmed.

VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

KIRSCH, J., Concurs.


text:
    Dustin BASS, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-32
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 16, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   MATHIAS, J.

Affirmed.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.


text:
    Dion JONES, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-542
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 16, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   MATHIAS, J.

Affirmed.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.


text:
    Isaac HICKS, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-87
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 16, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAILEY, J.

Affirmed.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.


text:
    In the MATTER OF the Involuntary Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: O.O. (Minor Child), and T.G. (Mother), Appellant-Respondent, v. The Indiana Department of Child Services, Appellee-Petitioner and Child Advocates, Inc., Guardian ad Litem
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JT-551
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 15, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAKER, J.

Affirmed.

MAY, J., Concurs.

ROBB, J., Concurs.


text:
    Wendell H. LAWSON, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-334
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 15, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAKER, J.

Affirmed.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.

BROWN, J., Concurs.


text:
    In the MATTER OF the INVOLUNTARY TERMINATION OF the PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIPS OF: J.H., J.P., and Ja.H. (Minor Children),
    J.H. (Mother), Appellant-Respondent, v. The Indiana Department of Child Services, Appellee-Petitioner
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JT-677
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 15, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAKER, J.

Affirmed.

MAY, J., Concurs.

ROBB, J., Concurs.


author: NAJAM, J., Concurs.

text:
    Nathaniel BENNETT, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-71
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 15, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
    BARTEAU, Sr.J.
    Affirmed.
   NAJAM, J., Concurs.

KIRSCH, J., Concurs.


text:
    Tiawana M. HUGHES, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-397
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 17, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   NAJAM, J.

Affirmed.

CRONE, J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


author: BRADFORD, J.

text:
    Timothy M. SNAPP, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-604
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 17, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BRADFORD, J.

Affirmed.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.


author: BAILEY, J.

text:
    Charles KINNEL, Appellant-Petitioner, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Respondent.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 49A05-1708-CR-1892
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 17, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAILEY, J.

Affirmed.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.


text:
    Derrick D. ARMSTEAD, Appellant-Petitioner, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Respondent.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-PC-378
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 17, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAILEY, J.

Affirmed.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.


text:
    In the MATTER OF the INVOLUNTARY TERMINATION OF the PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP OF B.W., J.W., C.Y., Ry.Y., J.Y. (Minor Children) and R.Y. (Father) and S.L. (Mother), Appellants-Respondents, v. The Indiana Department of Child Services, Appellee-Petitioner.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JT-510
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 17, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAILEY, J.

Affirmed.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.


text:
    In the MATTER OF the Involuntary Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of J.I., JR., Minor Child,
    J.I., Father, Appellant-Respondent, v. The Indiana Department of Child Services, Appellee-Petitioner.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JT-339
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 16, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BROWN, J.

Affirmed.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

CRONE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Thomas Lee CAMPBELL, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-598
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 16, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   RILEY, J.

Affirmed.

VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

KIRSCH, J., Concurs.


text:
    Kristopher G. RICHTER, Appellant, v. Kaylie E. SEXTON, Appellee.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 71A03-1710-JP-2394
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 16, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BROWN, J.

Affirmed.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

CRONE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Timothy ALLEN, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-367
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 16, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BROWN, J.

Affirmed.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

CRONE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Bradley BACK, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-583
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 20, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BROWN, J.

Affirmed.

ALTICE, J., Concurs.

TAVITAS, J., Concurs.


text:
    IN RE Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of J.L.-E. (Minor Child) and B.T. (Mother), Appellant-Respondent, v. Indiana Department of Child Services, Appellee-Petitioner.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JT-503
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 20, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BRADFORD, J.

Affirmed.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.


text:
    Maeson Lee COFFIN, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-506
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 20, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   CRONE, J.

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Jeffery C. HATCHER, Jr., Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-787
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 20, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   NAJAM, J.

Affirmed.

CRONE, J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Rondre COOK, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 82A05-1712-CR-2907
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 21, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   ROBB, J.

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., Concurs.

ALTICE, J., Concurs.


author: MATHIAS, J.

text:
    Valencia A. JACKSON, Appellant-Respondent, v. Kenneth S. JACKSON, Appellee-Petitioner.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-DR-282
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 21, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   MATHIAS, J.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

RILEY, J., Concurs.

MAY, J., Concurs.


text:
    Cory D. CRUMPTON, Appellant-Respondent, v. Fallon (Crumpton) FERNANDES, Appellee-Petitioner
    Court of Appeals Case No. 17A-DR-3032
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 21, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   VAIDIK, C.J.

Reversed.

PYLE, J., Concurs.

BARNES, Sr.J., Concurs.


text:
    Devin JOHNSON, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-461
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 21, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   ROBB, J.

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., Concurs.

ALTICE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Joey Lee OFFILL, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 58A01-1711-CR-2692
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 21, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BRADFORD, J.

Affirmed.

BROWN, J., Concurs.

ALTICE, J., Concurs.


text:
    CITIZENS ACTION COALITION OF INDIANA, INC., Appellant-Intervenor, v. DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, LLC, Appellee-Petitioner.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-EX-141
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 21, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BRADFORD, J.

Affirmed.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.


text:
    Donna M. ADAMS, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-886
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 20, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAILEY, J.

Affirmed.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.


text:
    Robert Carl JOHNSON, Appellant-Plaintiff, v. CORRECTIONS OFFICER CAPTAIN BLATTNER, et al., Appellees-Defendants.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 48A05-1711-PL-2840
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 20, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAILEY, J.

Reversed and remanded.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.


text:
    FLOYD MEMORIAL HOSPITAL AND HEALTH SERVICES, Appellant-Defendant v. HARRISON COUNTY HOSPITAL, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-PL-46
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 20, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BRADFORD, J.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.


author: BAKER, J., Concurs.

text:
    Paul D. BOAS and Doris E. Boas, Appellants-Plaintiffs, v. HAYDEN METHODIST CHURCH, Jon Stoner, Erin Stoner, and River Valley Financial Bank, Appellees-Defendants.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-PL-608
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 22, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
    FRIEDLANDER, Sr.J.
    Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded with instructions.
   BAKER, J., Concurs.

KIRSCH, J., Concurs.


text:
    AUTOMOTIVE FINANCE CORPORATION dba AFC Automotive Finance Corporation dba AFC, Appellant-Plaintiff, v. THORNTON MOTOR COMPANY, INC. dba Thornton Motor Company ; Alan William Thornton aka Alan W. Thornton aka Alan Thornton; and Leslie Diane Thornton aka Leslie D. Thornton aka Leslie Sahzman Thornton aka Leslie Thornton aka Leslie S. Thornton, Appellees-Defendants
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CC-571
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 22, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   VAIDIK, C.J.

Reversed and remanded.

PYLE, J., Concurs.

BARNES, Sr.J., Concurs.


text:
    Jermaine DRAKE, Appellant-Petitioner, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Respondent
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-PC-79
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 22, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   VAIDIK, C.J.

Affirmed.

PYLE, J., Concurs.

BARNES, Sr.J., Concurs.


text:
    Robert Eric POSEY, Appellant-Petitioner, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Respondent
    Court of Appeals Case No. 84A05-1711-PC-2808
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 22, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAKER, J.

Affirmed.

MAY, J., Concurs.

ROBB, J., Concurs.


text:
    Janice Lynn BUHRT, Appellant-Petitioner, v. Dennis Ray BUHRT, Appellee-Respondent.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-DR-1159
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 24, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAILEY, J.

Dismissed.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.


text:
    Kevin WALKER, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-153
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 23, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BRADFORD, J.

Affirmed.

BROWN, J., Concurs.

ALTICE, J., Concurs.


author: PYLE, J.

text:
    Anthony James HOOD, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 45A04-1709-CR-2255
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 23, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   PYLE, J.

Affirmed.

KIRSCH, J., Concurs.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.


author: ALTICE, J.

text:
    Austin D. JOHNSON, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-155
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 23, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   ALTICE, J.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded.

BROWN, J., Concurs.

TAVITAS, J., Concurs.


text:
    Katrina E. COTTRELL, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-722
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 23, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   ALTICE, J.

Affirmed.

BROWN, J., Concurs.

TAVITAS, J., Concurs.


text:
    Shayla Monique BRAZIER, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Cause No. 71A03-1712-CR-2949
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 23, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   RILEY, J.

Affirmed.

VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

KIRSCH, J., Concurs.


text:
    Bryan L. WILLIAMS, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-739
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 23, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   ALTICE, J.

Affirmed.

BROWN, J., Concurs.

TAVITAS, J., Concurs.


text:
    IN RE: The Matter of J.W., a Child in Need of Services (CHINS);
    M.W. (Mother), Appellant-Respondent, v. Indiana Department of Child Services, et al., Appellee-Petitioner.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JC-432
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 23, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   PYLE, J.

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., Concurs.

CRONE, J., Concurs.


text:
    In re the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of: R.C.; C.C., Sr. (Father), Appellant-Respondent v. The INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CHILD SERVICES, Appellee-Petitioner.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 20A03-1712-JT-2832
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 23, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   PYLE, J.

Affirmed.

VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

BARNES, Sr.J., Concurs.


author: ROBB, J.

text:
    Timmothy FLORA, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-600
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 27, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   ROBB, J.

Affirmed.

BAKER, J., Concurs.

MAY, J., Concurs.


text:
    Timothy D. MARTIN, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 29A04-1712-CR-2992
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 27, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   NAJAM, J.

Affirmed.

ALTICE, J., Concurs.

ROBB, J., Dissents with separate opinion.


text:
    IN RE: The 2015 TAX SALE MARION COUNTY PARCEL NO. 8017356 TAX SALE ITEM NO. A2747
    Empire VII Indiana Portfolio, LLC, Appellant, v. Migally Investments, LLC, Appellee.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 49A02-1712-MI-2882
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 27, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BROWN, J.

Affirmed.

ALTICE, J., Concurs.

TAVITAS, J., Concurs.


author: MAY, J.

text:
    In the MATTER OF the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of L.M. (Child) and G.J. (Mother) and A.M. (Father);
    G.J (Mother) and A.M. (Father), Appellants-Respondents, v. The Indiana Department of Child Services, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JT-619
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 27, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   MAY, J.

Affirmed.

BAKER, J., Concurs.

ROBB, J., Concurs.


text:
    IN RE the GUARDIANSHIP OF William Henry BROUGHTON (Alleged Incapacitated Adult),
    Dennis Broughton, Kevin Broughton, and Otis Broughton, Appellants-Cross-Petitioners, v. Warren Broughton, Appellee-Petitioner.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-GU-44
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 28, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   MATHIAS, J.

Affirmed and remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.

1

--------


text:
    Jewell ALLEN, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 49A02-1710-CR-2344
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 28, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAKER, J.

Affirmed.

MAY, J., Concurs.

ROBB, J., Concurs.


text:
    IN RE the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of A.R. and Ma.R. (Minor Children) and M.R. (Father) and J.R. (Mother), Appellants-Respondents, v. Indiana Department of Child Services, Appellee-Petitioner.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JT-288
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 28, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   MATHIAS, J.

Affirmed.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.


text:
    Brian Zachari BRUCE, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-891
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 28, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAILEY, J.

Affirmed.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.


text:
    IN RE the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of C.B.(1) and C.B.(2) (Minor Children) and C.B. (Father), Appellant-Respondent, v. Indiana Department of Child Services, Appellee-Petitioner.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JT-579
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 28, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   MATHIAS, J.

Affirmed.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.

1

--------


text:
    John KOCHOWIEC, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 32A01-1712-CR-2910
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 27, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   ROBB, J.

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., Concurs.

ALTICE, J., Concurs.


text:
    STATE of Indiana, Appellant-Plaintiff, v. Deja CANADY, Jamel Hoskin, and Anthony Harmon, Appellees-Defendants.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 49A02-1710-CR-2285
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 27, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
    BARNES, Sr.J.
    Affirmed.
   VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Devin BAYS, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 28A05-1711-CR-2702
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 27, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
    FRIEDLANDER, Sr.J.
    Affirmed.
   NAJAM, J., Concurs.

ROBB, J., Concurs.


text:
    Clifford J. REFFITT, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-532
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 27, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BRADFORD, J.

Affirmed.

BROWN, J., Concurs.

ALTICE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Dean PENRY, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-665
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 29, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   NAJAM, J.

Affirmed.

CRONE, J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


author: KIRSCH, J., Concurs.

text:
    Jimmy NAVE, Jr., Appellant-Petitioner, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Respondent.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 48A04-1708-PC-2007
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 29, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
    SHARPNACK, Sr.J.
    Affirmed.
   KIRSCH, J., Concurs.

CRONE, J., Concurs.


text:
    In the MATTER OF the Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of C.H. (Minor Child);
    B.H. (Father), Appellant-Respondent, v. Indiana Department of Child Services, Appellee-Petitioner.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-JT-449
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 29, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   NAJAM, J.

Affirmed.

CRONE, J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Susan TENNANT, Appellant-Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff, v. PEAKS & VALLEYS, INC., and Toni Staples, Appellees-Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants
    Court of Appeals Case No. 92A04-1710-CC-2474
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 28, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BAKER, J.

Granted.

VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

BARNES, Sr.J., Concurs.


text:
    Corey DAY, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-103
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 28, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   MATHIAS, J.

Affirmed.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

BRADFORD, J., Concurs.


text:
    James Walter FOLKS, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 20A03-1710-CR-2317
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   MAY, J.

Affirmed.

RILEY, J., Concurs.

MATHIAS, J., Concurs.


text:
    Kori F. RICE, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 68A01-1706-CR-1314
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   PYLE, J.

Affirmed.

VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

BARNES, Sr.J., Concurs.


text:
    Ryan P. BALLARD, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 32A01-1704-PC-762
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   PYLE, J.

Affirmed.

KIRSCH, J., Concurs.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.


text:
    Zachary Allen FIX, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-268
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 29, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
    SHARPNACK, Sr.J.
    Affirmed.
   BAILEY, J., Concurs.

BROWN, J., Concurs.


text:
    Kyle L. BALSER, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-473
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 29, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   ALTICE, J.

Affirmed.

BROWN, J., Concurs.

TAVITAS, J., Concurs.


text:
    Mark BARNES, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 49A05-1612-CR-2940
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 29, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   ROBB, J.

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., Concurs.

ALTICE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Dutch A. CHOATE, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-814
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 29, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   NAJAM, J.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded for resentencing.

CRONE, J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Timothy DAVIS, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 57A03-1709-CR-2124
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 29, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   ROBB, J.

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., Concurs.

ALTICE, J., Concurs.


author: VAIDIK, C.J.

text:
    Amber KRIEG, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-1230
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 29, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   VAIDIK, C.J.

Reversed.

RILEY, J., Concurs.

KIRSCH, J., Concurs.


text:
    Timothy M. SCHIEVE, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 26A01-1711-CR-2815
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   PYLE, J.

Affirmed.

VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

BARNES, Sr.J., Concurs.


text:
    Vernon THACKER, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-709
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   PYLE, J.

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., Concurs.

CRONE, J., Concurs.


author: CRONE, J.

text:
    Roderic JERNIGAN, Sr., Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-689
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   CRONE, J.

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    BUTLER TERRACE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., Appellant-Cross-claim Plaintiff, v. Ranee S. RATHEE, Appellee-Cross-claim Defendant.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-MF-675
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   NAJAM, J.

Affirmed.

CRONE, J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Mathis FRANKLIN, Jr., Appellant-Plaintiff, v. BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING, LLC, and M & M Mortgage, Inc., Appellees-Defendants.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 17A-PL-3058
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BRADFORD, J.

Affirmed.

VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Maryann WOLANIN and James A. Bridges, Appellants/Defendants, v. Susan BALANOW, Appellee/Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-PL-93
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   PYLE, J.

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., Concurs.

CRONE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Maurice WEBSTER, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-336
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 30, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   CRONE, J.

Affirmed.

NAJAM, J., Concurs.

PYLE, J., Concurs.


author: BROWN, J.

text:
    David NEWSON, Appellant-Petitioner, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Respondent.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 49A05-1708-PC-1785
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 31, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BROWN, J.

Affirmed.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

CRONE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Anthony BEDOLLA, Appellant-Petitioner, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Respondent.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 49A02-1712-PC-3004
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 31, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   BROWN, J.

Affirmed.

BAILEY, J., Concurs.

CRONE, J., Concurs.


text:
    Kraig Matthew WYATT, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-358
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    FILED August 31, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
    RUCKER, Sr.J.
    Affirmed.
   KIRSCH, J., Concurs.

ALTICE, J., Concurs.


author: KIRSCH, J.

text:
    Chase Edward MOUREY, Jr., Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
    Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-328
    Court of Appeals of Indiana.
    Filed August 31, 2018
    DISPOSITION OF CASE BY UNPUBLISHED MEMORANDUM DECISION
   KIRSCH, J.

Affirmed.

VAIDIK, C.J., Concurs.

RILEY, J., Concurs.