MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), FILED this Memorandum Decision shall not be Jul 11 2019, 8:44 am regarded as precedent or cited before any CLERK court except for the purpose of establishing Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals the defense of res judicata, collateral and Tax Court
estoppel, or the law of the case.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE David W. Stone, IV Curtis T. Hill, Jr. Anderson, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana Ellen H. Meilaender Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Corey Jackson, July 11, 2019 Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No. 19A-CR-339 v. Appeal from the Madison Circuit Court State of Indiana, The Honorable Mark Dudley, Appellee-Plaintiff. Judge Trial Court Cause No. 48C06-1705-F6-1108
Riley, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-339 | July 11, 2019 Page 1 of 7 STATEMENT OF THE CASE
[1] Appellant-Respondent, Corey Jackson (Jackson), appeals from the trial court’s
revocation of his community corrections placement.
[2] We affirm.
ISSUE [3] Jackson presents us with one issue on appeal, which we restate as: Whether the
State proved by a preponderance of the evidence that he violated a term of his
community corrections placement by being under the influence.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY [4] On August 1, 2017, Jackson pleaded guilty to Level 6 felony failure to return to
lawful detention. The trial court sentenced him to two years, all of which was
suspended to probation. On May 16, 2018, after Jackson admitted to several
violations of his probation, the trial court ordered him to execute his two-year
sentence through Madison County’s Community Corrections Continuum of
Sanctions (COS) program. Jackson was placed on work release through COS.
On November 28, 2018, the trial court found that Jackson had violated the
terms of his work release, for, among other things, leaving the hospital without
being discharged after he had been transported for treatment upon being found
unresponsive at work release. The trial court ordered Jackson to return to the
COS program, where Jackson continued to be placed on work release.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-339 | July 11, 2019 Page 2 of 7 [5] On December 6, 2018, Jackson was at the Madison County Work Release
Center (Center). Jackson shoved his way past another participant who was
talking to Center employee Mandy Hall (Hall). Jackson proceeded to the
Center’s day room, where he clung to a wall and a garbage can, immobile.
Although standing, Jackson was “dazed” and was unresponsive to Hall’s
questions. (Transcript p. 26). A bench was placed under Jackson, but he was
unable to seat himself. Community Corrections and Center employees
removed Jackson from the wall where he was still standing and carried him to
another room to ascertain his condition.
[6] Once removed from the wall, Jackson’s feet at times would quickly kick back
and forth. Jackson did not respond to questions being posed by those attending
to him. An employee administered Narcan to Jackson via his nostril. After
receiving the Narcan, Jackson regained his ability to speak and move but
became verbally and physically combative with staff.
[7] Jackson was transported to St. Vincent Anderson Regional Hospital for
treatment. Jackson denied smoking Spice or ingesting any other drug, but he
refused to provide a urine sample when requested by hospital staff. It was
noted in Jackson’s medical records that he had a history of seizure disorder.
The following was also noted in Jackson’s medical records: “It is of concern
that he was smoking [S]pice again today.” (Exh. 2 Exh. Vol. I, p. 8).
[8] On December 7, 2018, the State filed a Notice seeking termination of Jackson’s
COS placement, alleging that Jackson had committed violations by being under
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-339 | July 11, 2019 Page 3 of 7 the influence on December 6, 2018; 1 Jackson had been combative with staff on
December 6, 2018; and Jackson was $112.71 in arrears to COS. On January 9,
2019, the trial court held an evidentiary hearing on the State’s Notice. Center
employee Connor McCoy (McCoy) was Jackson’s case manager and had been
trained to recognize the signs of Spice intoxication. In McCoy’s opinion,
Jackson’s behavior and condition at work release on December 6, 2018, were
consistent with someone who had “ingested K2 or is overdosing on Spice[.]”
(Tr. p. 22). Hall had also been trained to recognize the indicia of substance
intoxication. It was her opinion that Jackson exhibited signs of intoxication on
December 6, 2018. Jackson’s records from his medical treatment following the
December 6, 2018, incident were admitted into evidence.
[9] The trial court found that Jackson violated the terms of his COS commitment
by being under the influence on December 6, 2018. 2 The trial court ordered
Jackson to serve an additional two days at the Madison County Jail. The trial
court also placed Jackson directly on work release for the remainder of his
sentence.
1 A copy of the terms of Jackson’s COS placement is not part of the record on appeal. Jackson does not dispute that this allegation stated a potential violation. 2 The trial court found that the State had proven one of the other alleged violations, but it is unclear which one because the trial court made differing pronouncements of judgment in its oral and written judgment statements. Jackson does not dispute that the trial court found a second violation. As a general rule, a finding of one violation is sufficient to revoke a community corrections placement. Treece v. State, 10 N.E.3d 52, 60 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014), trans. denied. However, given the uncertainty regarding which of the other violations was proven, we will address Jackson’s challenge to the evidence regarding the trial court’s finding that he was under the influence on December 6, 2018.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-339 | July 11, 2019 Page 4 of 7 [10] Jackson now appeals. Additional facts will be provided as necessary.
DISCUSSION AND DECISION [11] Jackson challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the trial court’s
determination that he violated the terms of his community corrections
placement by being under the influence on December 6, 2018. We begin by
noting that placement in a community corrections program is a matter of grace
and not a right to which a defendant is entitled. Cox v. State, 706 N.E.2d 547,
549 (Ind. 1999). A community corrections revocation hearing is a civil
proceeding, and the State must prove that revocation is warranted by the
preponderance of the evidence. State v. Rivera, 20 N.E.3d 857, 860 (Ind. Ct.
App. 2014), trans. denied. Upon review of the evidence supporting the
revocation of a community corrections placement, we consider the evidence
most favorable to the trial court’s judgment. Holmes v. State, 923 N.E. 2d 479,
483 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). We neither reweigh the evidence nor reassess the
credibility of the witnesses. Id. We will affirm the decision to revoke if there is
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), FILED this Memorandum Decision shall not be Jul 11 2019, 8:44 am regarded as precedent or cited before any CLERK court except for the purpose of establishing Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals the defense of res judicata, collateral and Tax Court
estoppel, or the law of the case.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE David W. Stone, IV Curtis T. Hill, Jr. Anderson, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana Ellen H. Meilaender Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Corey Jackson, July 11, 2019 Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No. 19A-CR-339 v. Appeal from the Madison Circuit Court State of Indiana, The Honorable Mark Dudley, Appellee-Plaintiff. Judge Trial Court Cause No. 48C06-1705-F6-1108
Riley, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-339 | July 11, 2019 Page 1 of 7 STATEMENT OF THE CASE
[1] Appellant-Respondent, Corey Jackson (Jackson), appeals from the trial court’s
revocation of his community corrections placement.
[2] We affirm.
ISSUE [3] Jackson presents us with one issue on appeal, which we restate as: Whether the
State proved by a preponderance of the evidence that he violated a term of his
community corrections placement by being under the influence.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY [4] On August 1, 2017, Jackson pleaded guilty to Level 6 felony failure to return to
lawful detention. The trial court sentenced him to two years, all of which was
suspended to probation. On May 16, 2018, after Jackson admitted to several
violations of his probation, the trial court ordered him to execute his two-year
sentence through Madison County’s Community Corrections Continuum of
Sanctions (COS) program. Jackson was placed on work release through COS.
On November 28, 2018, the trial court found that Jackson had violated the
terms of his work release, for, among other things, leaving the hospital without
being discharged after he had been transported for treatment upon being found
unresponsive at work release. The trial court ordered Jackson to return to the
COS program, where Jackson continued to be placed on work release.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-339 | July 11, 2019 Page 2 of 7 [5] On December 6, 2018, Jackson was at the Madison County Work Release
Center (Center). Jackson shoved his way past another participant who was
talking to Center employee Mandy Hall (Hall). Jackson proceeded to the
Center’s day room, where he clung to a wall and a garbage can, immobile.
Although standing, Jackson was “dazed” and was unresponsive to Hall’s
questions. (Transcript p. 26). A bench was placed under Jackson, but he was
unable to seat himself. Community Corrections and Center employees
removed Jackson from the wall where he was still standing and carried him to
another room to ascertain his condition.
[6] Once removed from the wall, Jackson’s feet at times would quickly kick back
and forth. Jackson did not respond to questions being posed by those attending
to him. An employee administered Narcan to Jackson via his nostril. After
receiving the Narcan, Jackson regained his ability to speak and move but
became verbally and physically combative with staff.
[7] Jackson was transported to St. Vincent Anderson Regional Hospital for
treatment. Jackson denied smoking Spice or ingesting any other drug, but he
refused to provide a urine sample when requested by hospital staff. It was
noted in Jackson’s medical records that he had a history of seizure disorder.
The following was also noted in Jackson’s medical records: “It is of concern
that he was smoking [S]pice again today.” (Exh. 2 Exh. Vol. I, p. 8).
[8] On December 7, 2018, the State filed a Notice seeking termination of Jackson’s
COS placement, alleging that Jackson had committed violations by being under
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-339 | July 11, 2019 Page 3 of 7 the influence on December 6, 2018; 1 Jackson had been combative with staff on
December 6, 2018; and Jackson was $112.71 in arrears to COS. On January 9,
2019, the trial court held an evidentiary hearing on the State’s Notice. Center
employee Connor McCoy (McCoy) was Jackson’s case manager and had been
trained to recognize the signs of Spice intoxication. In McCoy’s opinion,
Jackson’s behavior and condition at work release on December 6, 2018, were
consistent with someone who had “ingested K2 or is overdosing on Spice[.]”
(Tr. p. 22). Hall had also been trained to recognize the indicia of substance
intoxication. It was her opinion that Jackson exhibited signs of intoxication on
December 6, 2018. Jackson’s records from his medical treatment following the
December 6, 2018, incident were admitted into evidence.
[9] The trial court found that Jackson violated the terms of his COS commitment
by being under the influence on December 6, 2018. 2 The trial court ordered
Jackson to serve an additional two days at the Madison County Jail. The trial
court also placed Jackson directly on work release for the remainder of his
sentence.
1 A copy of the terms of Jackson’s COS placement is not part of the record on appeal. Jackson does not dispute that this allegation stated a potential violation. 2 The trial court found that the State had proven one of the other alleged violations, but it is unclear which one because the trial court made differing pronouncements of judgment in its oral and written judgment statements. Jackson does not dispute that the trial court found a second violation. As a general rule, a finding of one violation is sufficient to revoke a community corrections placement. Treece v. State, 10 N.E.3d 52, 60 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014), trans. denied. However, given the uncertainty regarding which of the other violations was proven, we will address Jackson’s challenge to the evidence regarding the trial court’s finding that he was under the influence on December 6, 2018.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-339 | July 11, 2019 Page 4 of 7 [10] Jackson now appeals. Additional facts will be provided as necessary.
DISCUSSION AND DECISION [11] Jackson challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the trial court’s
determination that he violated the terms of his community corrections
placement by being under the influence on December 6, 2018. We begin by
noting that placement in a community corrections program is a matter of grace
and not a right to which a defendant is entitled. Cox v. State, 706 N.E.2d 547,
549 (Ind. 1999). A community corrections revocation hearing is a civil
proceeding, and the State must prove that revocation is warranted by the
preponderance of the evidence. State v. Rivera, 20 N.E.3d 857, 860 (Ind. Ct.
App. 2014), trans. denied. Upon review of the evidence supporting the
revocation of a community corrections placement, we consider the evidence
most favorable to the trial court’s judgment. Holmes v. State, 923 N.E. 2d 479,
483 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010). We neither reweigh the evidence nor reassess the
credibility of the witnesses. Id. We will affirm the decision to revoke if there is
substantial evidence of probative value to support the trial court’s decision. Id.
[12] Here, the evidence showed that Jackson shoved his way past Hall and another
COS participant before making his way to the day room where he was “dazed,”
unresponsive, and immobile. (Tr. p. 26). Conner and Hall, who were trained
to recognize the indicia of intoxication, believed that Jackson was intoxicated.
Conner specifically believed that Jackson displayed the indicia of someone who
was “overdosing on Spice[.]” (Tr. p. 22). Medical professionals who treated
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-339 | July 11, 2019 Page 5 of 7 Jackson that day and who were aware that he had a history of seizure disorder
suspected that his condition was attributable to Spice ingestion. In addition,
Jackson refused to provide a urine sample when requested at the hospital,
which supported a reasonable inference that he knew of his violation. We find
that this was substantial, probative evidence that Jackson was under the
influence on December 6, 2018. See Holmes, 923 N.E. 2d at 483.
[13] On appeal, Jackson directs our attention to evidence supporting his claim that
he experienced a non-drug-related seizure on December 6, 2018. We find that
this portion of Jackson’s argument is merely a request that we consider
evidence that does not support the trial court’s judgment and reassess the
credibility of witnesses, which is contrary to our standard of review. Id. In
addition, assuming, without deciding, that the trial court improperly considered
Jackson’s swearing at staff after he was administered Narcan as evidence of
drug intoxication, we find that the remainder of the evidence adequately
supports the trial court’s finding. We also agree with the State that Jackson’s
quasi due process claim that the State failed to prove that his purported seizure
activity was intentional does not apply to his case. The State did not allege in
its violation Notice that Jackson violated his COS placement by having a
seizure; rather, it alleged that he violated his placement by voluntarily being
under the influence. Accordingly, we do not address Jackson’s due process
argument further.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-339 | July 11, 2019 Page 6 of 7 CONCLUSION [14] Based on the foregoing, we conclude that the State proved by a preponderance
of the evidence that Jackson violated the terms of his COS placement by being
under the influence on December 6, 2018.
[15] Affirmed.
[16] Bailey, J. and Pyle, J. concur
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-339 | July 11, 2019 Page 7 of 7