$47,940.00 U.S. Currency and Dustin Sorhaindo v. State of Indiana and Indiana State Police
2017 Ind. App. LEXIS 228
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- On June 30, 2015 IMPD officers executed a search warrant on a parcel addressed to Dustin Sorhaindo; officers found $47,940 in currency but no narcotics.
- The State filed a Notice and Motion to Transfer Seized Property under cause MC-22791 (a Marion County miscellaneous criminal filing) asserting the funds were narcotics proceeds; mailed notices to addresses on the parcel were returned.
- Sorhaindo retained Indiana counsel and attempted to file objections; the Prosecutor’s Office advised delays because the MC docket type would not produce a hearing.
- The State subsequently filed a civil forfeiture complaint and a transfer motion in a different Marion County courtroom under cause MI-42103; the trial court granted the transfer in MI-42103 on January 5, 2016 (later stayed), and again issued an order granting transfer on July 19, 2016 without an evidentiary hearing.
- Sorhaindo moved to dismiss MI-42103 under Trial Rule 12(B)(8), arguing the same action was pending in MC-22791; the Court of Appeals held Courtroom 6 (MC-22791) had first-acquired exclusive jurisdiction and set aside the transfer order in MI-42103, remanding turnover proceedings to MC-22791.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court properly allowed the State to pursue transfer in MI-42103 when a similar transfer motion was pending in MC-22791 | State: MC-22791 was a non-active "dummy" tracking number that could not host a hearing, so filing in MI-42103 was necessary | Sorhaindo: Both causes involve the same parties, subject matter, and remedy; Trial Rule 12(B)(8) requires dismissal of the later-filed action | Court: MC-22791 was a pending active case first acquiring jurisdiction; MI-42103 lacked jurisdiction and its transfer order was set aside |
Key Cases Cited
- Pivarnik v. N. Ind. Pub. Serv. Co., 636 N.E.2d 131 (Ind. 1994) (court first acquiring jurisdiction has exclusive jurisdiction)
- Ind. & Mich. Elec. Co. v. Terre Haute Indus., Inc., 467 N.E.2d 37 (Ind. Ct. App. 1984) (grant/denial of dismissal for same action pending elsewhere reviewed de novo)
- Membres v. State, 889 N.E.2d 265 (Ind. 2008) (recognition of MC-designated miscellaneous criminal filings in Marion County practice)
- Adams v. State, 967 N.E.2d 568 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (property owner entitled to challenge legality of search underlying transfer request)