Johnson v. State
2011 Ind. App. LEXIS 1912
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Johnson was sentenced in Sept. 2007 to six years with five suspended to probation; probation supervision was transferred to Michigan (Berrien County).
- July 2008 probation violation found but Johnson remained on probation and supervision continued in Michigan.
- July 2, 2010 Berrien County probation officer notified of Johnson's Michigan misdemeanor theft conviction.
- Aug. 23, 2010 notice stated Johnson failed to report after release and his whereabouts were unknown; Michigan residence appeared vacant.
- Sept. 21, 2010 St. Joseph County Probation Department filed a petition to revoke; initial hearing set for Oct. 26, 2010; Johnson failed to appear and a bench warrant was issued.
- Dec. 14, 2010 Johnson appeared in custody for an initial hearing; trial court scheduled an evidentiary hearing for Feb. 11, 2011; court rejected defense concerns about Interstate Compact compliance and revoked Johnson's probation, ordering him to serve the previously suspended five years.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court had jurisdiction to revoke probation under the Interstate Compact. | Johnson contends lack of jurisdiction due to noncompliance with the Compact. | State contends court retains jurisdiction despite noncompliance and Johnson waived certain procedural rights. | Yes; court had jurisdiction despite alleged noncompliance and waiver. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ker v. Illinois, 119 U.S. 436 (U.S. 1886) (extradition formality not required to bring defendant within jurisdiction)
- Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S. 778 (U.S. 1973) (due process rights for probation revocation hearings; Morrissey framework)
- Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 (U.S. 1972) (due process requirements for preliminary revocation hearings)
- Morrissey v. Brewer (cited with Gagnon relation), 408 U.S. 471 (U.S. 1972) (see above)
- U.S. v. Alvarez-Machain, 504 U.S. 655 (U.S. 1992) (extraterritorial arrest and jurisdiction principles applied to cross-state proceedings)
- Martin v. State, 176 Ind.App. 503, 376 N.E.2d 498 (Ind. Ct. App. 1978) (extradition/transfer context in Indiana; focus on ability to adjudicate despite transfer)
- Morgan v. State, 691 N.E.2d 466 (Ind. Ct. App. 1998) (Interstate Compact transfer does not transfer subject matter jurisdiction)
- K.S. v. State, 849 N.E.2d 538 (Ind. 2006) (subject matter/personal jurisdiction standards in Indiana)