HASTE v. State
2012 Ind. App. LEXIS 247
Ind. Ct. App.2012Background
- Haste was convicted of Class B felony dealing in methamphetamine on July 21, 2011.
- A sentencing hearing on August 17, 2011 included restitution considerations; the court sentenced Haste to a ten-year term and stated restitution was under advisement.
- The State sought restitution totaling $90,000 related to damage from manufacturing activities.
- On August 23, 2011, Haste filed a Notice of Appeal before the court issued any restitution order.
- The clerk filed the Notice of Completion of Clerk's Record on August 23, 2011, and the appeal proceeded.
- The parties argued about finality of the sentencing order and timeliness of any appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the August 17, 2011 sentencing order was a final judgment | Haste argues the restitution issue remained; order not final | State contends the sentencing order disposed of all issues | Not a final judgment; appeal dismissed |
| Whether a restitution order under advisement affects finality of judgment | Restitution under advisement prevents final disposition | Restitution is part of sentencing; pending admissibility not final | Restitution under advisement prevents finality; appeal dismissed on jurisdiction |
| Whether Haste may appeal or pursue belated appeal given potential October 24, 2011 restitution order | Possible belated appeal under Post-Conviction Rule 2 | Timeliness under Rule 9(A)(1) governs; potential belated route unclear | Appeal dismissed for lack of timely final-judgment appeal; belated avenue possible but not granted |
Key Cases Cited
- Georgos v. Jackson, 790 N.E.2d 448 (Ind.2003) (final judgment and subject-matter jurisdiction rules)
- Terrell v. State, 390 N.E.2d 208 (Ind.App. 1979) (sentencing as final judgment in criminal cases)
- Wilson v. State, 688 N.E.2d 1293 (Ind.Ct.App.1997) (restitution as part of criminal sentence)
- Kotsopoulos v. State, 654 N.E.2d 44 (Ind.Ct.App. 1995) (restitution considerations related to sentencing)
- State v. Hunter, 904 N.E.2d 371 (Ind.Ct.App.2009) (timeliness prerequisites for appeals under Appellate Rule 9(A)(5))
- R.R.F. v. L.L.F., 956 N.E.2d 1135 (Ind.Ct.App.2011) (record matters; matters outside the record not considered)