Preview:

Pursuant to Ind.Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral estoppel, or the law of the case. APPELLANT PRO SE: DANNY T. DUNLAP Michigan City, Indiana ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: GREGORY F. ZOELLER Attorney General of Indiana NICOLE M. SCHUSTER Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

FILED
of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

Jun 30 2010, 10:04 am

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
DANNY T. DUNLAP, Appellant-Defendant, vs. STATE OF INDIANA, Appellee-Plaintiff. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

CLERK

No. 49A02-0907-PC-620

APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable Steven J. Rubick, Magistrate Cause No. 49G04-0011-PC-204466

June 30, 2010 MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

MAY, Judge

Danny Dunlap appeals the denial of his petition for Post-Conviction Relief. We affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Dunlap was convicted of murder1 and pled guilty to possession of cocaine, a Class D felony.2 We affirmed his murder conviction. See Dunlap v. State, Cause No. 49A02-0208CR-680 (Ind. Ct. App. March 24, 2003). Dunlap petitioned pro se for post-conviction relief, and the court appointed counsel. Dunlap eventually withdrew that petition and refiled pro se some time later. After he amended the petition, a hearing was held. Dunlap testified at the hearing and submitted two documents3 in support of his assertion that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the admission of his confession to murder, as he claims the confession was the fruit of an illegal search and seizure.4 The trial court denied Dunlap's petition. Dunlap filed a motion to correct error, which was also denied. DISCUSSION AND DECISION Dunlap bore the burden of establishing the grounds for post-conviction relief by a preponderance of the evidence. See Ind. Post-Conviction Rule 1(5); Timberlake v. State, 753 N.E.2d 591, 597 (Ind. 2001), reh'g denied, cert. denied 537 U.S. 839 (2002). In reviewing a post-conviction court's judgment, we consider only the evidence and reasonable inferences

1 2

Ind. Code

Download Danny T. Dunlap v. State of Indiana.pdf

Indiana Law