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: MARCE GONZALEZ, JR. Dyer, Indiana

FILED
Sep 25 2008, 9:37 am
of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

CLERK

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: STEPHEN R. CARTER Attorney General of Indiana Indianapolis, Indiana NICOLE M. SCHUSTER Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
TIMOTHY DION HAMPTON, Appellant-Defendant, vs. STATE OF INDIANA, Appellee-Plaintiff. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 45A03-0804-CR-196

APPEAL FROM THE LAKE SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable Salvador Vasquez, Judge Cause No. 45G01-0503-MR-00003

SEPTEMBER 25, 2008 MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION GARRARD, Senior Judge

Hampton was tried and convicted of Class A felony battery and Class D felony neglect of a dependent. He was also found in direct contempt of court for outbursts in proceedings prior to the trial. Another panel of this court vacated his neglect conviction on double jeopardy grounds and confirmed his thirty-seven year sentence for Class A felony battery. In this appeal he seeks review of the trial court's refusal to permit a belated appeal pursuant to Ind. Post-Conviction Rule 2 of the orders finding him in contempt and imposing sentences of one year on each offense with those sentences to be served consecutively. Because the trial court denied his petition without hearing, we owe that decision no deference and review the matter de novo. Baysinger v. State, 835 N.E.2d 223, 224 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005). To be entitled to relief under P-C.R. 2 a defendant must show that he failed to file a timely notice of appeal; that this failure was not due to his fault; and, that he has been diligent in requesting permission to file under this rule. P-C.R. 2,

Download 09250802wgs.pdf

Indiana Law