Background

• Glispie was convicted of criminal trespass (Class A misdemeanor) after a bench trial based on Officer McPherson's testimony.
• The incident occurred at Modern Office Photo Supply's building in Indianapolis, where Glispie had previously been warned not to trespass.
• Officer McPherson had given Glispie oral and written trespass warnings prior to the October 13, 2010 event and arrested him on that date.
• The State's sole evidence at trial was McPherson's testimony; Glispie moved for involuntary dismissal under Trial Rule 41(B) which the court denied.
• The court found Glispie guilty; on appeal, the conviction was reversed due to insufficiency of evidence, specifically regarding agency.
• The court stated that, without establishing an agency relationship between McPherson and Modern, the State failed to prove the essential element of denial of entry.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Wright v. State, 828 N.E.2d 904 (Ind.2005) (standard for sufficiency reviews)
• Johnson v. Blankenship, 679 N.E.2d 505 (Ind.Ct.App.1997) (elements of an actual agency relationship)
• Demming v. Underwood, 943 N.E.2d 878 (Ind.Ct.App.2011) (elements of agency: manifestation, acceptance, control)
• Hope Lutheran Church v. Chellew, 460 N.E.2d 1244 (Ind.Ct.App.1984) (apparent agency requires principal's manifestation to third party)
• United Artists Theatre Circuit, Inc. v. Ind. Dep’t of State Revenue, 459 N.E.2d 754 (Ind.Ct.App.1984) (agency cannot be proven by agent's declaration alone)
• Pourghoraishi v. Flying J, Inc., 449 F.3d 751 (7th Cir.2006) (police officer cannot create trespass violation absent ownership/agency)
• Bowman v. State, 468 N.E.2d 1064 (Ind.Ct.App.1984) (distinguishes off-duty officer as private agent in security context)
• Lovitt v. State, 915 N.E.2d 1040 (Ind.Ct.App.2009) (statutory interpretation of agency implications)