Bryant L. White v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

• Court: Indiana Court of Appeals
• Decided: May 5, 2017
• Docket: 53A01-1701-CR-186
• Status: Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be FILED regarded as precedent or cited before any May 05 2017, 7:04 am court except for the purpose of establishing CLERK the defense of res judicata, collateral Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals estoppel, or the law of the case. and Tax Court

APPELLANT PRO SE ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Bryant L. White Curtis T. Hill, Jr. Carlisle, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana Jesse R. Drum Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Bryant L. White, May 5, 2017 Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No. 53A01-1701-CR-186 v. Appeal from the Monroe Circuit Court State of Indiana, The Honorable Marc R. Kellams, Appellee-Plaintiff Judge Trial Court Cause No. 53C02-1106-FD-485

Baker, Judge.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 53A01-1701-CR-186 | May 5, 2017 Page 1 of 3 [1] On June 1, 2011, the State charged Bryant White with dealing in marijuana and

maintaining a common nuisance. At the time of his arrest, officers from the

Bloomington Police Department seized $1815 in cash that was in White’s

possession. On July 23, 2013, the Child Support Enforcement Agency filed an

Income Withholding Order (IWO) in two cases under which White owed child

support: a divorce case and a paternity case. In the divorce case, 1 the IWO

directed the Bloomington Police Department to withhold $315 for White’s past

due child support. Appellant’s App. Vol. II p. 27-30. In the paternity case,2 the

IWO directed the Bloomington Police Department to withhold $1,500 for

White’s past due child support. Id. at 31-34. White did not challenge the

issuance of the IWOs under either the divorce case or the paternity case. The

Bloomington Police Department transmitted White’s cash pursuant to the

IWOs.

[2] On January 5, 2015, the State dismissed the criminal charges against White.

On December 27, 2016, White filed a motion in the criminal case for the return

of his seized cash. The State objected, noting that the seized cash had been

applied to White’s outstanding child support obligations pursuant to the IWOs

in the divorce and paternity cases. The trial court denied White’s motion, and

White now appeals.

1 Cause number 53C06-0901-DR-52. 2 Cause number 53C07-0101-JP-17.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 53A01-1701-CR-186 | May 5, 2017 Page 2 of 3 [3] The IWOs were issued in July 2013 under the divorce and paternity cases.

Over three years later, when White sought the return of his seized currency in

the criminal case, the money had long since been applied to his outstanding

child support obligation. Had he desired to challenge the IWOs, he should

have filed timely challenges under the divorce and paternity cases—the cases in

which the orders were actually issued. The criminal case was not the proper

case in which to challenge the IWOs, and by the time White sought the return

of his property, it was no longer in the possession of the Bloomington Police

Department (and had not been for over three years). Under these

circumstances, the trial court did not err by denying White’s motion.

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

Barnes, J., and Crone, J., concur.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 53A01-1701-CR-186 | May 5, 2017 Page 3 of 3