ILNews

Court affirms escape conviction for home detention violation

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Court of Appeals Tuesday affirmed a Class D felony escape conviction for an Indianapolis man arrested after he broke his home detention curfew.

Steven Anderson was arrested in the early morning hours of June 5, 2013, outside his home hours later than allowed under his Marion County Community Corrections agreement. A jury convicted Anderson of escape but cleared him on a Class D felony count of attempted residential entry and Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement.

Judge Melissa May wrote for the court the agreement Anderson signed included a provision that violation of the agreement could result in a charge of escape. She dismissed his argument that when the court allowed evidence of events from the prior night, this was an improper admission of prior bad acts. The prior night, the monitoring company reported Anderson’s bracelet in another residence and other bracelets at his residence.

May wrote that Anderson had waived the argument by not objecting at trial. “We need not address whether fundamental error occurred because there was no error,” she wrote in Steven Anderson v. State of Indiana,  49A02-1309-CR-788.

“Anderson’s actions on June 4 were not evidence of prior bad acts which would prejudice him, but merely part of the 'single transaction' of escape, and therefore the evidence from June 4 was properly admitted to prove an escape that continued into June 5,” she wrote for the court. “… Accordingly, we affirm.”




 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. He did not have an "unlicensed handgun" in his pocket. Firearms are not licensed in Indiana. He apparently possessed a handgun without a license to carry, but it's not the handgun that is licensed (or registered).

  2. Once again, Indiana's legislature proves how friendly it is to monopolies. This latest bill by Hershman demonstrates the lengths Indiana's representatives are willing to go to put big business's (especially utilities') interests above those of everyday working people. Maassal argues that if the technology (solar) is so good, it will be able to compete on its own. Too bad he doesn't feel the same way about the industries he represents. Instead, he wants to cut the small credit consumers get for using solar in order to "add a 'level of certainty'" to his industry. I haven't heard of or seen such a blatant money-grab by an industry since the days when our federal, state, and local governments were run by the railroad. Senator Hershman's constituents should remember this bill the next time he runs for office, and they should penalize him accordingly.

  3. From his recent appearance on WRTV to this story here, Frank is everywhere. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy, although he should stop using Eric Schnauffer for his 7th Circuit briefs. They're not THAT hard.

  4. They learn our language prior to coming here. My grandparents who came over on the boat, had to learn English and become familiarize with Americas customs and culture. They are in our land now, speak ENGLISH!!

  5. @ Rebecca D Fell, I am very sorry for your loss. I think it gives the family solace and a bit of closure to go to a road side memorial. Those that oppose them probably did not experience the loss of a child or a loved one.

ADVERTISEMENT