Two bodies found in Carroll County

[T.Lex]

So, this is kinda interesting. The evidentiary hearing on the probation violation is set for today. It looks like the chief deputy, Jerry Bean (I kinda knew him when he was Tippecanoe County prosecutor) is handling it. That seems like overkill for a probation violation, but maybe that's how they do things up there. Bean handled the original OWI > .08 case.

Indeed, he's being held without bond, which also seems extreme.

 

[Alpo]

Ok but they have the landowner not the grandfather.

I guess it works out that they don't have to charge the guy and can keep holding him since they have him on a probation violation.

I'm not suggesting that the grandfather was involved, only that the perp has a rather generic face that is similar to many in the midwest.

 

[Roland of Gilead]

So, this is kinda interesting. The evidentiary hearing on the probation violation is set for today. It looks like the chief deputy, Jerry Bean (I kinda knew him when he was Tippecanoe County prosecutor) is handling it. That seems like overkill for a probation violation, but maybe that's how they do things up there. Bean handled the original OWI > .08 case.

Indeed, he's being held without bond, which also seems extreme.

Thanks for the update. Is there a different procedure or term used when holding someone on a probation violation? For some reason I didn't think bond was SOP for probation violation until the hearing.

 

[T.Lex]

Thanks for the update. Is there a different procedure or term used when holding someone on a probation violation? For some reason I didn't think bond was SOP for probation violation until the hearing.

As with most questions asked of lawyers, it depends. Not intentionally being facetious, but there are a lot of variables.

Our resident Marion County LEOs can attest to how VOPs are handled in Indy. I doubt very many are held without bond. In fact, I suspect they are OR'd (released on the Own Recognizance). That is, unless they are suspected or arrested for another crime.

In my limited (and outdated) experience, bond for VOPs follows whatever bond schedule would apply to the underlying crime in that county. They might be held overnight or something, but a bond hearing would usually require a nominal amount for a "normal" kind of violation. Being held without bond would usually require some sort of showing that he's a risk of flight or some other reason to keep him in jail.

(As an aside, there's an Indiana Constitutional requirement for bond in criminal cases. Article 1, sections 16 and 17: all criminal cases except murder and treason should be allowed bail, and "excessive" bail shall not be required.)

BTW, from the available dockets, it looks like the landowner had a bit of a drinking problem. Well, the drinking wasn't the problem, but the driving appeared to be.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

I heard that Fox 59 reported the hearing was postponed.

As with most questions asked of lawyers, it depends. Not intentionally being facetious, but there are a lot of variables.

Our resident Marion County LEOs can attest to how VOPs are handled in Indy. I doubt very many are held without bond. In fact, I suspect they are OR'd (released on the Own Recognizance). That is, unless they are suspected or arrested for another crime.

In my limited (and outdated) experience, bond for VOPs follows whatever bond schedule would apply to the underlying crime in that county. They might be held overnight or something, but a bond hearing would usually require a nominal amount for a "normal" kind of violation. Being held without bond would usually require some sort of showing that he's a risk of flight or some other reason to keep him in jail.

(As an aside, there's an Indiana Constitutional requirement for bond in criminal cases. Article 1, sections 16 and 17: all criminal cases except murder and treason should be allowed bail, and "excessive" bail shall not be required.)

How are OWIs in general handled in Marion Co? Is it common for the first one to be charged as an OWI? I know other counties vary. For instance in Lake co, generally speaking unless there were aggravating factors a DUI can be pled down to reckless and not just the first one either. Porter co next door, I won't say no way in hell, but definitely a cold day. If charged with a OWI, they won't plead down.

Is VOP a criminal matter? He's already been convicted of the crime, this is just a possible modification of sentence/condition. So would bond be required to be offered the same as a new charge?

 

[T.Lex]

I heard that Fox 59 reported the hearing was postponed.

I'm not surprised. That will likely affect whether there's bond allowed. If it remains no-bond, that would be a big deal IMHO.

How are OWIs in general handled in Marion Co? Is it common for the first one to be charged as an OWI? I know other counties vary. For instance in Lake co, generally speaking unless there were aggravating factors a DUI can be pled down to reckless and not just the first one either. Porter co next door, I won't say no way in hell, but definitely a cold day. If charged with a OWI, they won't plead down.

The advantage to local prosecutors having discretion in these matters is that they can reflect the will of the people of that county as to what is important. That's also the disadvantage - it can lead to a patchwork of enforcement depending on geography.

I do not have the professional experience to credibly describe how these things are handled across Indiana in practical terms.

Is VOP a criminal matter? He's already been convicted of the crime, this is just a possible modification of sentence/condition. So would bond be required to be offered the same as a new charge?

A VOP is a criminal matter, as it is an extension of the original criminal matter. It is not a new crime, on its own. The judge can set a bond for the VOP, though, so they can get out pending the hearing of the VOP "charge."

 

[Timjoebillybob]

I'm not surprised. That will likely affect whether there's bond allowed. If it remains no-bond, that would be a big deal IMHO.


The advantage to local prosecutors having discretion in these matters is that they can reflect the will of the people of that county as to what is important. That's also the disadvantage - it can lead to a patchwork of enforcement depending on geography.

I do not have the professional experience to credibly describe how these things are handled across Indiana in practical terms.


A VOP is a criminal matter, as it is an extension of the original criminal matter. It is not a new crime, on its own. The judge can set a bond for the VOP, though, so they can get out pending the hearing of the VOP "charge."

I agree that it may be telling if he is still held no bond.

I should have been a little more clear. My point/question was since DUIs and other crimes are handled differently by different counties, is VOP the same? Let's say a VOP for OWI probation in Lake vs a VOP for OWI probation in Porter vs same in Marion vs same in Carroll. Or are the rules for them more uniform statewide? If a county goes after OWI much harder than another county would they do the same for VOP of the same?

And thanks for the info. I have very little experience with VOP, and very very outdated. When I was a yout I was hit with it once on a minor possession of alcohol charge, the PO told me he was filing and he'd let me know when the date was. No warrant/arrest. But that was a class c misd (I think) compared to a lvl 6 felony so... It was also city court vs county.

 

[T.Lex]

I should have been a little more clear. My point/question was since DUIs and other crimes are handled differently by different counties, is VOP the same? Let's say a VOP for OWI probation in Lake vs a VOP for OWI probation in Porter vs same in Marion vs same in Carroll. Or are the rules for them more uniform statewide? If a county goes after OWI much harder than another county would they do the same for VOP of the same?

Ah - right. It is the same in the sense that every county can handle it somewhat differently. The rules/laws about how to "charge" a VOP and what can happen are the same, but like with crimes, it is up to the elected prosecutor to decide how to handle them.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

A VOP is a criminal matter, as it is an extension of the original criminal matter. It is not a new crime, on its own. The judge can set a bond for the VOP, though, so they can get out pending the hearing of the VOP "charge."

Ah - right. It is the same in the sense that every county can handle it somewhat differently. The rules/laws about how to "charge" a VOP and what can happen are the same, but like with crimes, it is up to the elected prosecutor to decide how to handle them.

From what I can find out, it seems that for VOP bond can be set, but it isn't required to be unless the person is held for more than 15 days before a hearing. But he did have his first hearing on 3/13.
courts.IN.gov: IV. Procedures for Addressing Probation Violations in Intrastate Transfer cases
Indiana Code Title 35. Criminal Law and Procedure IN CODE § 35-38-2-3 | FindLaw

What has me wondering is why they are filing a VOP now, he should have been off probation. He pled and was sentenced in 2014 to 2 yrs suspended and 2 yrs probation. Per the court he could file for alternative misd sentencing once he was off probation, and his attorney filed on 3/3 then asked to court to disregard on 3/7. Warrant was issued on 3/10. Yes they have up to a year to file VOP after they are off probation, but...

 

[T.Lex]

Yes, some aspects of this situation suggest it is being treated differently than usual. Difficult not to read more into it.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Yes, some aspects of this situation suggest it is being treated differently than usual. Difficult not to read more into it.

Actually he was probably still on probation and him or his attorney jumped the gun a bit on the petition for AMT. The 2 yrs was to be served consecutively with his prior sentence. He was hit with probation revocation and put on house arrest with GPS monitoring for the remainder of his sentence for his prior OWI at the same time as the sentencing for his latest OWI. So he effectively had just under 1 yr house arrest and 2 yrs of probation after.

 

[Fargo]

I'm not surprised. That will likely affect whether there's bond allowed. If it remains no-bond, that would be a big deal IMHO.


The advantage to local prosecutors having discretion in these matters is that they can reflect the will of the people of that county as to what is important. That's also the disadvantage - it can lead to a patchwork of enforcement depending on geography.

I do not have the professional experience to credibly describe how these things are handled across Indiana in practical terms.


A VOP is a criminal matter, as it is an extension of the original criminal matter. It is not a new crime, on its own. The judge can set a bond for the VOP, though, so they can get out pending the hearing of the VOP "charge."

Actually, probation violations are civil in nature. That said there are due process requirements involved but they are inherently civil.

A probation hearing is civil in nature and the State need only prove the alleged eviolations by a preponderance of the evidence. Braxton v. State, 651 N.E.2d 268, 270 (Ind. 1995).

In my experience each court and each county treats them very differently. I have practiced in courts which had a default no-bond on probation warrants as well as those that would almost never do so. In the smaller counties with very small prosecutors offices, it is common for the chief deputy to handle probation matters whereas in bigger counties they normally would almost never do so.

It could be that this no bond warrant has been specially handled for obvious reasons or it could just be the normal process of the court. I would say the most important thing to consider is what the alleged violation is. I don't know that that has been reported?

 

[Fargo]

Actually he was probably still on probation and him or his attorney jumped the gun a bit on the petition for AMT. The 2 yrs was to be served consecutively with his prior sentence. He was hit with probation revocation and put on house arrest with GPS monitoring for the remainder of his sentence for his prior OWI at the same time as the sentencing for his latest OWI. So he effectively had just under 1 yr house arrest and 2 yrs of probation after.

I haven't pulled the case summaries or done the math, but don't forget that a year of home detention really is usually only six months on misdemeanors or level six felonies.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Actually, probation violations are civil in nature. That said there are due process requirements involved but they are inherently civil.

In my experience each court and each county treats them very differently. I have practiced in courts which had a default no-bond on probation warrants as well as those that would almost never do so. In the smaller counties with very small prosecutors offices, it is common for the chief deputy to handle probation matters whereas in bigger counties they normally would almost never do so.

It could be that this no bond warrant has been specially handled for obvious reasons or it could just be the normal process of the court. I would say the most important thing to consider is what the alleged violation is. I don't know that that has been reported?

Thanks much for the info. You learn something new everyday around here. Actually I've learned a few new things today on here.

I haven't pulled the case summaries or done the math, but don't forget that a year of home detention really is usually only six months on misdemeanors or level six felonies.

It seems that both sentences were imposed on 10/8/2014. 1 yr home detention with 21 days credit for time served and class A credit allowed (no idea what class A credit is) on the revocation and 2 yrs suspended and 2 yrs probation on the new OWI to be served consecutively. So if the home detention was 2 for 1, it would be close.

 

[Fargo]

Thanks much for the info. You learn something new everyday around here. Actually I've learned a few new things today on here.



It seems that both sentences were imposed on 10/8/2014. 1 yr home detention with 21 days credit for time served and class A credit allowed (no idea what class A credit is) on the revocation and 2 yrs suspended and 2 yrs probation on the new OWI to be served consecutively. So if the home detention was 2 for 1, it would be close.

Class A credit means that you remained in good behavior and so receive two days credit for each day actually served. If he remained in good behavior for the remainder of his home detention he would functionally get a 50% reduction.

 

[Trigger Time]

You don't blame him for not cooperating?

**** no! Even if my own child was found murdered I wouldn't be talking to a single cop till I had my lawyer there. I'm talking after the known fact.
way too many innocent people framed by prosecutors and some by police.
you are in it (as a cop) so I understand IF (not saying you are) you personaly are wired to think different Frank but not talking to the cops is the smart and safe bet. My freedom and breathing mater to me. Even knowing I have nothing in my car or home that's illegal I won't consent to searches. I still support the police.

 

[T.Lex]

Actually, probation violations are civil in nature. That said there are due process requirements involved but they are inherently civil.

[sigh]

Yes, I tried not to confuse the issue TOO much. So tell, me, do VOPs get a new cause number now?

PCRs get a new cause number, are civil, but try explaining to people how they aren't a criminal case. Trying to explain that infractions and ordinance violations aren't criminal cases is tricky, too.

Inside baseball to most people.

It could be that this no bond warrant has been specially handled for obvious reasons or it could just be the normal process of the court. I would say the most important thing to consider is what the alleged violation is. I don't know that that has been reported?

Dude has a prior case from late 2013 that he also got a VOP for in 2014 (perhaps even related to the newer case). That CCS entry says he was held without bond on that, too. For quite awhile, actually. It looks like that's fairly standard for that court - which means there's pretty good pressure to get the hearing done quickly.

 

[Fargo]

[sigh]

Yes, I tried not to confuse the issue TOO much. So tell, me, do VOPs get a new cause number now?

PCRs get a new cause number, are civil, but try explaining to people how they aren't a criminal case. Trying to explain that infractions and ordinance violations aren't criminal cases is tricky, too.

Inside baseball to most people.



Dude has a prior case from late 2013 that he also got a VOP for in 2014 (perhaps even related to the newer case). That CCS entry says he was held without bond on that, too. For quite awhile, actually. It looks like that's fairly standard for that court - which means there's pretty good pressure to get the hearing done quickly.

Civil burden of proof, evidentiary rules that would be unconstitutional in a criminal trial, way fewer due process rights, no corpus delecti rule, etc. make VOPs very different from a criminal proceeding; so much so that I believe it is a distinction worth making. Fundamentally they are a court enforcing its prior order on a person who has already been convicted. I'm not so sure the distinction is so esoteric as to be insider baseball.

 

[T.Lex]

Civil burden of proof, evidentiary rules that would be unconstitutional in a criminal trial, way fewer due process rights, no corpus delecti rule, etc. make VOPs very different from a criminal proceeding; so much so that I believe it is a distinction worth making. Fundamentally they are a court enforcing its prior order on a person who has already been convicted. I'm not so sure the distinction is so esoteric as to be insider baseball.

How many normal people know the things on your laundry list of differences?

Regardless, this is one of Kirk's faculty lounge discussions. We can answer the question differently, and that's ok.

 

[Fargo]

How many normal people know the things on your laundry list of differences?

Regardless, this is one of Kirk's faculty lounge discussions. We can answer the question differently, and that's ok.

The only reason I brought it up is because TimJoeBillyBob's question was very specific. I think most normal people understand proof beyond a reasonable doubt, the right to not be to be forced to testify against yourself, and the right to confront witnesses against you. None of those things are rights in a violation of probation like they are in a criminal hearing. Of course you are correct that the whole thing happens within the context of a criminal conviction, my only real,point was that the rules are REALLY different on VOPs than on open criminal charges.