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.





ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE:

DONALD W. PAGOS GREGORY F. ZOELLER
Michigan City, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana
   Indianapolis, Indiana

   ARTURO RODRIGUEZ II
   Deputy Attorney General
   Indianapolis, Indiana  

  

IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA



JANE MARIE BURKART, )
)
Appellant-Defendant, )
)
vs. ) No. 46A03-0908-CR-385
)
STATE OF INDIANA, )
)
Appellee-Plaintiff. )



APPEAL FROM THE LAPORTE SUPERIOR COURT
The Honorable William J. Boklund, Judge
Cause No. 46D04-0703-CM-679



NOVEMBER 16, 2010

MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

BARTEAU, Senior Judge
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Defendant-Appellant Jane Marie Burkart appeals her convictions of and sentence for five instances of abandonment or neglect of vertebrate animals, Class B misdemeanors.1  We affirm.
1 The offense of abandonment or neglect of vertebrate animals is codified at Indiana Code section 35-46-3-7.  (1987).

ISSUES
Burkart raises three issues for our review, which we restate as:
I. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in admitting evidence garnered after a warrantless search.

II. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in admitting evidence when the State failed to follow the statutory procedure regarding confiscation of animals.

III. Whether the sentence imposed by the trial court is inappropriate.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
  On March 7, 2007, Burkart

Download 11161002bbs.pdf

Indiana Law