Darrell Hall v. State of Indiana ( 2012 )


Menu:
  • Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D),
    FILED
    this Memorandum Decision shall not be
    regarded as precedent or cited before
    any court except for the purpose of                        Aug 17 2012, 8:41 am
    establishing the defense of res judicata,
    collateral estoppel, or the law of the case.                      CLERK
    of the supreme court,
    court of appeals and
    tax court
    ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT:                           ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE:
    SUZY ST. JOHN                                     GREGORY F. ZOELLER
    Marion County Public Defender                     Attorney General of Indiana
    Indianapolis, Indiana
    RICHARD C. WEBSTER
    Deputy Attorney General
    Indianapolis, Indiana
    IN THE
    COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
    DARRELL HALL,                                     )
    )
    Appellant-Defendant,                       )
    )
    vs.                                 )      No. 49A02-1201-CR-5
    )
    STATE OF INDIANA,                                 )
    )
    Appellee-Plaintiff.                        )
    APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT
    The Honorable Deborah J. Shook, Master Commissioner
    Cause No. 49F08-1110-CM-70391
    August 17, 2012
    MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION
    BARTEAU, Senior Judge
    Darrell Hall was charged with Class A misdemeanor battery for an incident
    involving his sister Tammy Hall and convicted of the lesser included offense of Class B
    misdemeanor battery. He now appeals the accuracy of the abstract of judgment, which
    shows that he was convicted of Class A misdemeanor battery. We remand.
    In October 2011, the State charged Hall with Class A misdemeanor battery. The
    information alleged that he knowingly touched Tammy in a rude, insolent, or angry
    manner and that the touching resulted in bodily injury to Tammy in the form of pain.
    Tammy did not testify at Hall’s bench trial. Instead, Tammy and Hall’s sister,
    Latonya Hall, testified for the State. Latonya testified that Hall and Tammy had been
    arguing for about fifteen minutes. Tammy threatened to call the police if Hall hit her.
    Latonya told Hall to leave Tammy alone and then left the room to get her grandchild
    ready for school. When she came back, she saw Tammy up against the wall, and Hall
    had the palm of his hand flat against Tammy’s chest, just below her neck.
    After the State rested, Hall moved for involuntary dismissal. The State conceded
    that there was not enough evidence to support the Class A misdemeanor, which would
    have required evidence of bodily injury, see Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1(a)(1)(A) (2009), but
    argued that the evidence supported the lesser included offense of Class B misdemeanor
    battery. The trial court denied Hall’s motion.
    After Hall testified in his own defense, the court found him guilty of the lesser
    included Class B misdemeanor:
    I don’t have any reason . . . to disbelieve this witness who is reluctant to be
    here and doesn’t want to get her brother into trouble. But he pushed the
    2
    woman against the wall, the alleged victim, against the wall and I’m finding
    him guilty [of] the lesser included B misdemeanor battery.
    Tr. p. 23. The court sentenced Hall to 180 days, which is the maximum term for a Class
    B misdemeanor.1 See Ind. Code § 35-50-3-3 (1977). The judgment of conviction shows
    that Hall was convicted of a Class B misdemeanor, but the abstract of judgment shows
    that he was convicted of a Class A misdemeanor.
    Hall contends that the abstract of judgment incorrectly shows that he was
    convicted of Class A misdemeanor battery. The State agrees. We conclude that the clear
    intent of the trial court was to convict Hall of Class B misdemeanor battery.                     We
    therefore remand with instructions to correct the abstract of judgment to so reflect. See
    Willey v. State, 
    712 N.E.2d 434
    , 445 n.8 (Ind. 1999) (“Based on the unambiguous nature
    of the trial court’s oral sentencing pronouncement, we conclude that the Abstract of
    Judgment and Sentencing Order contain clerical errors and remand this case for
    correction of those errors.”).
    Remanded with instructions.
    BAKER, J., and VAIDIK, J., concur.
    1
    The court ordered 132 days executed, for which Hall had jail credit, and 48 days suspended.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 49A02-1201-CR-5

Filed Date: 8/17/2012

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021