ILNews

White claims Brizzi ‘ignorant’ of law, jurors wowed by Super Bowl

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Former Secretary of State Charlie White says his convictions on six charges ranging from vote fraud to theft should be tossed because they violated state and federal law. He also claims that his lawyer, former Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi “was ignorant of the law.”

White’s petition for post-conviction relief also includes a litany of public officials he claims played fast and loose with voter registration information. White, a Republican from Fishers, was convicted last year. He was sentenced to one year of in-home detention and later removed from office and suspended from the bar. His convictions stemmed from accusations that he lied about his address on voter registration forms and didn’t live in the home he listed for voting purposes.

Hamilton Superior Judge Steve Nation as a condition of sentencing ruled White won’t begin serving his sentence until the post-conviction relief process is concluded. On March 15, White filed a 79-page post-conviction relief petition in Charles P. White v. State of Indiana, 29D01-1303-PC-2053.

White’s attorney, Andrea L. Ciobanu, argues that Brizzi failed to present a defense or move for a directed verdict, and that “Brizzi incriminated White with a jury nullification theme.” Ciobanu said White also is entitled to relief from his sentence because, among other things, he was convicted of the same offense more than once.

“The most egregious error is that Brizzi failed to present material evidence at trial, in fact, Brizzi failed to present any defense. The evidence was readily available for Brizzi to present,” Ciobanu wrote.

Ciobanu did not immediately return requests for comment on Friday.

The petition alleges a political witch hunt and a jury that was under duress because it was forced to deliberate past 11 p.m. on a weekend when Indianapolis was hosting the Super Bowl and no hotel rooms were available for sequestration. “There were free parties, concerts, and not to mention time to spend with friends and family. I am sure this court did not recognize the impact that such actions had on the jury,” Ciobanu wrote.

The petition also includes pages of other politicians who listed questionable voter registration information, including Gov. Mike Pence, former Gov. Mitch Daniels, former Sens. Birch Bayh and Evan Bayh, current Sen. Dan Coats, and former Vice President Dick Cheney.

A Hamilton County jury in February 2012 found White guilty of false registration, voting in another precinct, falsifying a voter registration form, submitting a false registration application, listing a false address on a marriage application and theft for receiving a salary as a de facto member of the Fishers Town Council.

Nation has set an Aug. 15 hearing on White’s post-conviction relief petition.

 

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT