Joseph Dixson v. State of Indiana
2014 Ind. App. LEXIS 618
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- In November 2013, Dixson, an inmate at the Duvall Residential Center, entered the cafeteria through an exit door contrary to facility rules and a guard's directions.
- Security guard Faith Hoosier ordered Dixson to leave and re-enter through the designated entrance; when he refused and became confrontational she warned she would use force and grabbed his forearm to remove him.
- A physical struggle ensued; Hoosier fell, injured her ankle, and later required physical therapy. The State charged Dixson with Class A misdemeanor battery.
- Dixson asserted self-defense at trial. The State tendered multiple self-defense instructions; the court gave Instruction 22 (requiring a reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm) and Instruction 23 (stating one may use reasonable force to defend against the imminent use of unlawful force).
- The jury convicted Dixson; he received a time-served sentence and appealed, arguing the self-defense instruction was erroneous.
Issues
| Issue | Dixson's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Instruction 22 misstated the law on self-defense by requiring a reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm | Instruction 22 improperly required showing fear of death/great bodily harm even though the assault did not involve deadly force | Instruction 23 (given alongside) correctly stated the law; any error was harmless | Court: Instruction 22 was erroneous and, taken with Instruction 23, the instructions conflicted and misled the jury, but error was harmless and conviction affirmed |
| Whether the instructional error requires reversal | The erroneous instruction could have misled the jury and affected the verdict | The evidence uncontradictedly showed Dixson was not in a right place and acted with fault, negating self-defense | Court: Error harmless because evidence clearly negated self-defense elements; no reversal |
Key Cases Cited
- Brooks v. State, 895 N.E.2d 130 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (standard for reviewing jury instructions for abuse of discretion)
- McCullough v. State, 985 N.E.2d 1135 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (self-defense elements include right to be present, lack of fault, and reasonable fear of death/serious bodily harm where deadly force is at issue)
- Hood v. State, 877 N.E.2d 492 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (discussing required elements for asserting self-defense)
- Randolph v. State, 802 N.E.2d 1008 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (harmless-error analysis for instructional errors)