Marlon Jackson v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

• Court: Indiana Court of Appeals
• Decided: October 18, 2018
• Docket: 18A-CR-825
• Status: Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM DECISION FILED Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), Oct 18 2018, 7:52 am this Memorandum Decision shall not be CLERK regarded as precedent or cited before any Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals court except for the purpose of establishing and Tax Court

the defense of res judicata, collateral estoppel, or the law of the case.

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Barbara J. Simmons Curtis T. Hill, Jr. Oldenburg, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana Ian McLean Supervising Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Marlon Jackson, October 18, 2018 Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-825 v. Appeal from the Marion Superior Court State of Indiana, The Honorable John Christ, Appellee-Plaintiff. Magistrate Trial Court Cause No. 49G14-1603-F6-10184

Robb, Judge.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-825 | October 18, 2018 Page 1 of 5 Case Summary and Issues [1] Following a bench trial, Marlon Jackson was convicted of possession of

marijuana, a Class B misdemeanor. Jackson presents two issues for our review,

both of which we addressed in detail in Jackson’s prior interlocutory appeal.

See Jackson v. State, No. 49A04-1701-CR-89 (Ind. Ct. App. Aug. 8, 2017).

Having already addressed Jackson’s arguments on interlocutory appeal, we

apply the law of the case doctrine and affirm in all respects.

Facts and Procedural History [2] Around 10:00 p.m. on the evening of March 13, 2016, Officer Brian Zotz of the

Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department observed a vehicle driving

backwards on 36th Street in Indianapolis. Officer Zotz assumed that the driver

had missed a turn and watched the vehicle stop at a stop sign before proceeding,

backwards, through the intersection. Concerned about heavy traffic and the

vehicle’s now rear-facing headlights, Officer Zotz initiated a traffic stop.

[3] Officer Zotz exited his vehicle and approached the driver, later identified as

Jackson. During this time, Officer Zotz observed Jackson remove a ball cap

and appear to place it on the floorboard of the vehicle. Officer Zotz made

contact with Jackson and his passenger at the driver’s side window. Officer

Zotz stated Jackson was “leaning hard to his right with his arms and his body

postured toward the center of the vehicle.” Transcript, Volume II at 54.

Jackson told Officer Zotz that a mechanical issue prevented the vehicle from

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-825 | October 18, 2018 Page 2 of 5 driving forward and that he was headed to his home on Rural Avenue,

approximately a mile away.

[4] As Jackson attempted to locate his identification, he opened the vehicle’s center

console. From his vantage point outside the vehicle, Officer Zotz noticed a

digital scale inside the console, which Officer Zotz knew from his prior training

and experience to be commonly associated with the distribution of illegal drugs.

Jackson and his passenger continued to reach around the floorboard area of the

vehicle as Officer Zotz collected the vehicle’s registration. Officer Zotz

returned to his vehicle to run Jackson’s information and requested a back-up

officer who arrived shortly thereafter. Officer Zotz and a second officer

approached Jackson and instructed him to exit the vehicle. Officer Zotz

smelled the odor of raw marijuana on Jackson’s person and subsequently

conducted a pat-down search of Jackson’s outer clothing for weapons. Officer

Zotz returned to the vehicle in order to locate the digital scale and as he lifted

Jackson’s hat from the floorboard, he noticed a small amount of marijuana and

marijuana seeds on the vehicle’s floorboard.

[5] Jackson later admitted that he had marijuana in his pocket and Officer Zotz

conducted a search of Jackson’s person revealing a clear plastic bag containing

what was later confirmed to be 7.13 grams of marijuana. Jackson was arrested

and charged with possession of marijuana, a Class B misdemeanor.

[6] On July 25, 2016, Jackson filed a motion to suppress. After a hearing on

November 3, the trial court denied Jackson’s motion but certified its order for

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-825 | October 18, 2018 Page 3 of 5 interlocutory appeal. This court accepted jurisdiction on February 3, 2017. In

his appeal, Jackson claimed the trial court erred by denying his motion to

suppress as certain evidence was obtained in violation of his rights under the

Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 11

of the Indiana Constitution. In a memorandum decision issued on August 8,

2017, we held Officer Zotz possessed reasonable suspicion under both

constitutional provisions and concluded the trial court properly denied

Jackson’s motion to suppress. Jackson, No. 49A04-1701-CR-89 at *2-4.

[7] The case proceeded to a bench trial on March 20, 2018. The trial court

overruled Jackson’s objections to the admission of the previously challenged

evidence and found Jackson guilty of possession of marijuana, a Class B

misdemeanor. Jackson was sentenced to sixty days in the Marion County Jail

with fifty-two days suspended. Jackson now appeals.

Discussion and Decision [8] The law of the case doctrine is a discretionary tool. Cutter v. State, 725 N.E.2d

401, 405 (Ind. 2000). The doctrine allows “appellate courts [to] decline to

revisit legal issues already determined on appeal in the same case and on

substantially the same facts[,]” and it may be applied “only to those issues

actually considered and decided on appeal.” Id. (internal quotation marks

omitted). The doctrine exists “to promote finality and judicial economy[,]” id.,

and applies to issues which were decided by an interlocutory appeal when the

same claims are repeated on appeal from a completed trial, Harper v. State, 963

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-825 | October 18, 2018 Page 4 of 5 N.E.2d 653, 658 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012), aff’d on reh’g, 968 N.E.2d 843 (Ind. Ct.

App. 2012), trans. denied.

[9] We considered and decided the issues presented here in Jackson’s prior

interlocutory appeal, holding Officer Zotz possessed reasonable suspicion when

he conducted a traffic stop on Jackson’s vehicle and the trial court therefore did

not err in denying Jackson’s motion to suppress. Jackson, No. 49A04-1701-CR-

89 at *4. Jackson has not presented any new arguments or authority for

reconsideration. Absent “extraordinary circumstances” or a showing the

original decision was “clearly erroneous and would work a manifest

injustice[,]” Leatherwood v. State, 880 N.E.2d 315, 319 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008),

trans. denied, we apply the law of the case doctrine and decline to revisit the

issues presented. Therefore, we affirm in all respects.

Conclusion [10] Having already considered and decided in Jackson’s prior interlocutory appeal

the issues presented here, we apply the law of the case doctrine and affirm in all

respects.

[11] Affirmed.

Baker, J., and May, J., concur.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-825 | October 18, 2018 Page 5 of 5