Brian J. Oberst v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
87A04-1704-CR-800
| Ind. Ct. App. | Oct 10, 2017Background
- On Jan. 27, 2015, ISP Trooper Ryan Wilson stopped Brian Oberst for speeding; Oberst displayed a Vanderburgh County Deputy Prosecutor badge and claimed to be with the Vanderburgh County Prosecutor’s Office.
- Trooper Wilson released Oberst without issuing a citation after Oberst’s representation and display of the badge.
- Trooper Wilson later learned Oberst had not worked as a Vanderburgh County deputy prosecutor for over six years; a prior similar incident occurred 13 days earlier where Oberst showed a badge and avoided a ticket.
- State charged Oberst with Level 6 felony impersonation; after a bench trial the court found him guilty and then reduced the conviction to a Class A misdemeanor impersonation of a public servant.
- Oberst appealed, arguing evidence was insufficient to show he acted with intent to mislead or induce the trooper to submit to his false authority or act to the trooper’s detriment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Oberst) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence was sufficient to prove Oberst intended to mislead/induce Trooper Wilson to submit to false official authority or act to his detriment | Circumstantial evidence (displayed badge, statement he was a deputy prosecutor, prior similar incident, post-stop phone call saying he "got out of the ticket") supports an inference of intent to obtain special treatment | Oberst argued he lacked intent to induce the trooper because a deputy prosecutor has no authority over an ISP trooper and at most sought a discretionary professional courtesy | Court affirmed: reasonable fact‑finder could infer intent to mislead/induce reliance; conviction upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- Poole v. State, 559 N.E.2d 1214 (Ind. Ct. App. 1990) (intent to mislead may be inferred from surrounding circumstances; defendant sought special treatment by claiming official status)
- Jackson v. State, 50 N.E.3d 767 (Ind. 2016) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- Drane v. State, 867 N.E.2d 144 (Ind. 2007) (evidence sufficient if reasonable inference supports conviction; appellate court must not reweigh evidence)