Danny Stephens v. State of Indiana
992 N.E.2d 935
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Stephens, intoxicated after an assault at his home by his niece’s boyfriend, sought police assistance to avoid returning home.
- Stephens walked to a nearby convenience store, where Officer Haddad encountered him in the parking lot.
- Officer Haddad noted Stephens smelled of alcohol, had bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, and an unsteady gait, and Stephens stated he had been drinking all night.
- Stephens told the officer he preferred arrest and placement in jail so he would not return home to danger, and he was arrested.
- Stephens was charged with class B misdemeanor public intoxication; the trial court convicted him after a bench trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was Stephens intoxicated to support public intoxication? | State argues impairment shown by odor, eyes, slurred speech, and unsteady gait; testimony supports intoxication. | Stephens contends impairment alone is insufficient under the amended statute. | Evidence supports intoxication. |
| Did Stephens endanger himself or others, breach or threaten to breach the peace, or harass/alarm another person? | State asserts the public setting and conduct endangered or threatened peace or harassed others. | Stephens argues no endangerment, breach, or harassment; he sought help after a private assault. | Evidence insufficient; conviction reversed for public intoxication on those elements. |
Key Cases Cited
- Williams v. State, 989 N.E.2d 366 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (supports assessing impairment and public safety consequences under amended statute)
- Moore v. State, 673 N.E.2d 776 (Ind. Ct. App. 1996) (standard for sufficiency of evidence beyond a reasonable doubt)
- Mathews v. State, 978 N.E.2d 438 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (no reweighing of evidence; review for probative value)
- Castillo-Aguilar v. State, 962 N.E.2d 667 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (prima facie error standard on an appellee's brief)