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.

FILED
Mar 09 2009, 10:14 am
of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

CLERK

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: CHRISTOPHER A. RAMSEY Ramsey Law Office Vincennes, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: GREGORY F. ZOELLER Attorney General of Indiana ANN L. GOODWIN Special Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

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

No. 42A05-0805-CR-277

APPEAL FROM THE KNOX SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable W. Timothy Crowley, Judge Cause No. 42D01-0509-FB-189

March 9, 2009 MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

MAY, Judge

Robert T. Cummins appeals the denial of his motion to dismiss pursuant to the Interstate Agreement on Detainers ("IAD"). Finding he waived his rights under the IAD, we affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On September 19, 2005, Cummins was charged in Knox County with Class B felony robbery. Cummins was released on his own recognizance so that he could

complete an existing sentence through work release. A jury trial was set for February 21, 2006 and was continued several times on Cummins motion. On February 1, 2007, Cummins filed a plea agreement and requested a change of plea hearing, which was set for March 7, 2007. Cummins failed to appear for the March 7 hearing because he had been arrested and was incarcerated at Graham Correctional Center in Illinois. Knox Superior Court 1 issued a bench warrant. According to Cummins, he was given paperwork stating Knox County had a "hold" on him. (Tr. at 10.) He provided his caseworker, Linda Billeau, with information so she could request a final disposition of the Knox County charges under the IAD. Billeau prepared the paperwork and sent copies to the Knox County Prosecutor and Knox Superior Court by certified mail. She addressed Knox Superior Courts copy to "Clerk of the Court" at 102 North Seventh Street, (Exhibit A), but 102 North Seventh Street is the Prosecutors address. The Prosecutors receptionist signed for both copies on September 4, 2007.1

1

The record does not reflect when the parties realized the Knox County Prosecutor had received the Knox Superior Courts copy by mistake. Cummins acknowledges there is no evidence the Knox County Prosecutor intentionally withheld the documents from the Knox Superior Court.

2

On February 5, 2008, the State filed a Motion for Status Hearing. The trial court scheduled a hearing for February 22, 2008. The State requested a continuance, and the trial court rescheduled the hearing for March 12, 2008. The hearing was continued again by the agreement of the parties. On March 14, 2008, Cummins filed a motion to dismiss, alleging that he had to be brought to trial within 180 days of September 4, 2007. A hearing on the motion was held on March 17, 2008. On March 24, 2008, the trial court denied the motion, finding: 1. That the Defendant, Robert T. Cummins, properly notified the Knox County Prosecutors Office of his request for disposition of his pending criminal charges by Certified Mail received September 4, 2007. 2. That the Defendant, Robert T. Cummins, failed to properly notify the Knox Superior Court 1 of his request for disposition of his pending criminal charges. 3. That while a representative of the Knox County Prosecutors Office did pick up the Certified Mail intended for the "Clerk of the Court" on September 4, 2007, the Certified Mail in question was, in fact, sent to the wrong address. The mail in question was sent to the address of the Knox County Prosecutor at 102 N. 7th Street, Vincennes, Indiana, rather than to the Office of the Knox County Clerk at 111 N. 7th Street, Vincennes, Indiana. 4. That while the Court understands and appreciates that a series of unfortunate events prevented the Defendants notice from reaching the Knox Superior Court 1, the fact remains that the Court was not notified as required by Article 3 of the detainer statute, I.C. 35-33-10-4. (Appellants App. at 5.) The trial court certified its order for interlocutory appeal, which we accepted. DISCUSSION AND DECISION "The IAD is an interstate compact between forty-eight states, the District of Columbia, and the Federal Government, which creates uniform procedures for lodging and executing a detainer." State v. Robinson, 863 N.E.2d 894, 896 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007), 3

trans. denied 869 N.E.2d 460 (Ind. 2007). Indiana and Illinois are parties to the IAD. State v. Smith, 882 N.E.2d 739, 742 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008); see Ind. Code

Download Robert T. Cummins v. State of Indiana.pdf

Indiana Law