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: ANNA E. ONAITIS Marion County Public Defender Indianapolis, Indiana

FILED
Mar 31 2009, 9:06 am
of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

CLERK

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: GREGORY F. ZOELLER Attorney General of Indiana Indianapolis, Indiana JANINE STECK HUFFMAN Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
MAUREEN SCHMIDT, Appellant-Defendant, vs. STATE OF INDIANA, Appellee-Plaintiff. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 49A02-0810-CR-939

APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable Rebekah Pierson-Treacy, Judge Cause No. 49F19-0801-CM-020096

MARCH 31, 2009 MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

SULLIVAN, Senior Judge

Maureen A. Schmidt (Schmidt) appeals her conviction for Battery Against a Law Enforcement Officer, as a Class A misdemeanor.1 Under the applicable statute, a person who commits a battery "against a law enforcement officer or against a person summoned and directed by the officer while the officer is engaged in the execution of his official duty" commits a Class A misdemeanor. The sole issue presented is whether the State's evidence adequately established that the law enforcement officer was "engaged in the execution of his official duties" at the time of the alleged battery. Appellant's Brief at 1. At the outset, it is important to note that determinations of fact are within the prerogative of the trier of fact--in this instance the trial court. The trier of fact is entitled to determine which version of an incident to credit, and we are not permitted to reweigh the evidence. Scott v. State, 867 N.E.2d 690 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007, transfer denied. The evidence most favorable to the judgment as adduced in the bench trial reflects that Officer Jason Bockting responded to a call from Schmidt to the Indianapolis Police Department reporting a theft of some vases from her residence. Bockting entered Schmidt's residence but refused to take a police report upon the belief that she was attempting to defraud her insurance company. Schmidt became belligerent and in ordering the officer to leave her house, grabbed his arm and

1

I.C.

Download Maureen Schmidt v. State of Indiana.pdf

Indiana Law