ILNews

COA dismisses appeal as untimely under T.R. 53.3(A)

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Court of Appeals dismissed a man’s appeal from the denial of his motion to correct error because he didn’t file his notice within 30 days of when the motion was deemed denied, which happened before the trial court actually ruled on the motion.

The trial court found Robert Bergstrom committed speeding. He challenged the finding and filed what the trial court construed as a motion to correct error Dec. 8, 2008. On June 7, 2009, the trial court ordered his counsel to file a “formal” motion to correct error within 30 days, which the attorney did. A hearing was held Nov. 5, 2009, but the trial court didn’t take any action on his motion until Feb. 5, 2010 – 92 days after the hearing.

Bergstrom filed his notice of appeal March 4, 2010, which is within 30 days of the trial court order, but his notice is untimely because that’s not the date it was deemed denied under Indiana Trial Rule 53.3(A), wrote Judge Paul Mathias in Robert C. Bergstrom, Jr. v. State of Indiana, No. 92A05-1003-IF-170. T.R. 53.3(A) says if a trial court fails to rule on a motion to correct error within 30 days after it was heard, the pending motion shall be deemed denied.

Bergstrom should have appealed by Dec. 7, 2009. Since he did not, his appeal was dismissed as untimely.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT