ILNews

Spotlight: Change of venue case requires planning, preparation and packing

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

From the sixth floor conference room in the law offices of Robert Gevers, visitors can look across the Fort Wayne skyline and see a collection of radio towers standing on the horizon.

The towers represent the media and the flood of information, commentary and entertainment that not only keeps the public abreast of what is happening in their community but can also taint a potential jury and hinder the chance for a fair trial. Such concerns over the sustained and extensive coverage of a high-profile case is why a trial of an Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department officer is being moved from Marion County to the Allen County Courthouse, half a block north of Gevers’ office.
 

surbeck Surbeck

On March 8, attorneys for the prosecution and the defense in the State of Indiana v. David Bisard, 49G05-1101-FB-002156, appeared in Allen Superior Court 1 for an initial pretrial conference where they began ironing out the details of changing venues with Allen Superior Judge John Surbeck.

Moving a trial from one court to another can be cumbersome and brings with it logistical matters that have to be worked out so the lawyers can focus on presenting their case. Transporting office supplies, reserving hotel rooms, securing conference rooms and learning the demographics of the community before selecting the jury are among the tasks that have to be addressed.

Yet, Surbeck and attorneys involved maintained the dynamics of actually trying the case will remain the same regardless of the location.

“The furniture is different but a courtroom is a courtroom,” Surbeck said. “Once you settle down and everybody gets to work, it doesn’t matter where the courtroom is. Everybody has a job to do and does it.”
 

courthouse-15col.jpg Allen County Superior Court I is in one of four historic courtrooms in the Allen County Courthouse. This will likely be the courtroom for the trial of Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Officer David Bisard. (IL Photo/ Marilyn Odendahl)

In February, Marion Superior Judge Grant Hawkins granted the defense motion for a change of venue in the Bisard case because of the media frenzy. Bisard is accused of driving drunk in his police vehicle and crashing it into three motorcyclists, killing one and injuring two others. He has been charged with reckless homicide and multiple operating while intoxicated charges.

Hawkins, in granting the motion for change of venue, pointed to the news coverage that has continued from the initial filing and often includes recaps of the high points in the case.

Attorneys on both sides say the trial date – scheduled tentatively to begin Oct. 15 – is the key to their preparation for trying the case in Allen County. Now that they know when they have to select a jury and present the evidence, they are able to start coordinating things like lodging, transportation of witnesses and how their computers can interface with the electronic devices available in the courtroom.

Surbeck said his first question for the Marion County prosecutors and defense attorneys will be how long they think the Bisard trial will take. Estimates have placed the length at four weeks, and while the judge will give the case as long as it needs, he pointed out he is not going to permit a lot of down time.

“I just think, bottom line, number one – me – and number two – everybody involved – needs to be fair and open-minded and use some common sense,” Surbeck said. “We’ll get through this and get a just result.”

Change is a rarity

The number of change of venue cases in Indiana during 2011 at first blush seems startling at 2,968. However, when calculated against the more than 1.6 million criminal and civil cases filed that year, the number represents less than 1 percent of the total docket, according to the Division of State Court Administration.

Two methods are available for orchestrating a change of venue trial.

Fort Wayne criminal defense attorney Michelle Kraus took part in one method when an out-of-town jury was brought to Allen County. She traveled to Clark County in southern Indiana to seat a jury and remembered having to be prepared to function away from the comforts of her home and office.

“It takes a lot of planning to be able to know who’s going to do what,” Kraus said. “You have to be really detailed.”

Usually, from the moment she woke up she was thinking about the details. Kraus and her team had to figure out where they could find copiers and access printers. They contacted a couple of area attorneys to see if they could commandeer a spare conference room.

The advantage in this type of change of venue is Kraus was able to sleep in her own bed and work from her own office once the trial began.

Marion County Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Denise Robinson experienced the other type of change of venue when she tried a murder case in Porter County. She and her colleagues loaded an SUV and U-Haul trailer with staplers, legal pads and computer monitors, among other things, and caravanned to northwest Indiana.

Robinson is the prosecuting attorney on the Bisard case, and she is reviewing the two-page list of items transported to Porter County to help determine what will have to be taken to Allen County.

John Kautzman, partner at Ruckelshaus Kautzman Blackwell Bemis & Hasbrook who is representing Bisard, said his team is figuring out both the logistical and financial challenges of trying the case in a county that is two-and-a-half hours away. Finding hotel rooms and work space are on the to-do list as well as possibly connecting with local counsel in Allen County.

The venue

The Bisard case will likely be tried in Allen Superior Court 1. The courtroom sits behind a set of wooden doors and, like the other historic courtrooms on the third floor of the Allen County Courthouse, it is a feast of colored scagliola, murals and bas-reliefs.

Allen County and Surbeck were chosen by the attorneys on both sides of the Bisard case. The parties presented Hawkins with two lists: the first list identified the counties in which the parties agreed the case could be sent, and the second list named the jurists they would accept to preside over the trial.

When Hawkins determined it was not feasible for him to be away from Marion County for the duration of the trial, the jurists named on the second list were asked if they would be willing to hear the case. Those who agreed were placed on another list from which each side could remove one name.

To select a jury, attorneys who have worked a change of venue case said an important element is knowing the demographics of the community. Being familiar with the background of the jurors, for example, if they reside in a rural or urban area, will help the lawyers not so much determine who to choose but how to present the evidence.

Inevitably, people will start to form opinions about a case based on what they read in the newspaper or see on television. In fact, Kraus wonders if the judge’s instructions to not read anything about the case may inspire some individuals to go home and search Google.

Gevers recalled when he started his career as a deputy prosecutor in Allen County, any murder trial would be splashed above the fold of the local newspapers day after day. Now it seems only the most heinous crimes garner that kind of media attention.

But, he said, while potential jurors may not know about a particular case, they can still be tainted by the books they read and the television shows they watch. Attorneys recognize the influence the media has through criminal justice shows like “CSI” and “Nancy Grace” and movies like “Double Jeopardy,” where dramatic courtroom scenes involve DNA analysis or forensic experts.

At times, Gevers said, jurors expectations have to be lowered.

“I don’t want them to have that false sense of what it’s going to be like, and when it’s not like that, they lose interest, lose sight of the case, get ticked off at me, at the other side, at the judge,” he said. “They come in thinking, ‘I’m going to be entertained.’”

Once a jury is seated, Surbeck will tell them, honestly, that they are going to be mistreated but that he will make sure they are mistreated as little as possible. People called to serve must give up their time and are tasked with doing a difficult job for which they have little training and for which they must reach a unanimous decision.

“People talk about juries,” he said. “People make fun of juries, but juries work very hard to do what they need to do and do very conscientiously.”

Local impact

Allen County court officials and local attorneys are not anticipating that the Bisard trial will create a major disruption. In mid-April, Surbeck’s calendar will start to be cleared in anticipation of the trial, but the local cases should still be tried in a timely fashion.

The courthouse will be able to handle the trial and the likely crush of Indianapolis media while still taking care of its daily business.

“As beautiful as this building is, as beautiful as the courtrooms are,” Allen Superior Court Executive Jerry Noble said, “it’s a working building.”•

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. I have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

  2. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

  3. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

  4. "Meanwhile small- and mid-size firms are getting squeezed and likely will not survive unless they become a boutique firm." I've been a business attorney in small, and now mid-size firm for over 30 years, and for over 30 years legal consultants have been preaching this exact same mantra of impending doom for small and mid-sized firms -- verbatim. This claim apparently helps them gin up merger opportunities from smaller firms who become convinced that they need to become larger overnight. The claim that large corporations are interested in cost-saving and efficiency has likewise been preached for decades, and is likewise bunk. If large corporations had any real interest in saving money they wouldn't use large law firms whose rates are substantially higher than those of high-quality mid-sized firms.

  5. The family is the foundation of all human government. That is the Grand Design. Modern governments throw off this Design and make bureaucratic war against the family, as does Hollywood and cultural elitists such as third wave feminists. Since WWII we have been on a ship of fools that way, with both the elite and government and their social engineering hacks relentlessly attacking the very foundation of social order. And their success? See it in the streets of Fergusson, on the food stamp doles (mostly broken families)and in the above article. Reject the Grand Design for true social function, enter the Glorious State to manage social dysfunction. Our Brave New World will be a prison camp, and we will welcome it as the only way to manage given the anarchy without it.

ADVERTISEMENT