958 N.E.2d 488
Ind. Ct. App.2011Background
- Clark's probation was transferred from Madison County to Tippecanoe County; Tippecanoe had supervisory authority and knew of violations from Tippecanoe cases.
- Madison County received a notice? actually Madison filed notice after learning of violations in 2011; receiving court determined timely filing clock.
- Elwood City Court improperly terminated probation in 2007; probation term extended to 2010, affecting notice timing.
- Notice was sent by Madison County Probation to Tippecanoe County in 2011; filing occurred February 7, 2011.
- Court held that notice to the receiving court is notice to the sentencing court, making the February 7, 2011 filing untimely under 45 days.
- Result: trial court abused its discretion; reversal of denial of motion to dismiss.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of notice under IC 35-38-2-3(a)(2)(B). | Clark | State | Untimely; notice not within 45 days of receiving notice. |
Key Cases Cited
- Louth v. State, 705 N.E.2d 1053 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999) (determinant of notice timing for probation violations)
- Sharp v. State, 807 N.E.2d 765 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (notice to receiving court accelerates prompt presentation of claims)
- Richardson v. State, 890 N.E.2d 766 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (probation violation suffices if any single condition breached)
- Runyon v. State, 939 N.E.2d 613 (Ind. 2010) (financial-condition violations require knowledge or intent to pay)