Matthew Pavlovich v. State of Indiana
2014 Ind. App. LEXIS 127
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Pavlovich was convicted of child solicitation (Class D felony) and patronizing a prostitute (Class A misdemeanor).
- The State sought to prove child solicitation via text messages and emails between Pavlovich and S.Y. (through an intermediary, her sister P.Y.).
- Pavlovich moved to dismiss the child solicitation charge; the trial court denied.
- The State introduced texts and emails and sought authentication linking Pavlovich to them; Pavlovich challenged authentication.
- The trial court denied Pavlovich’s motion for a directed verdict on the child solicitation charge; the jury convicted on that count and on patronizing a prostitute.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the information properly stated the offense | Pavlovich argues the charge lacks specificity | State contends the information tracks the statute and includes essential elements | Count II facially sufficient |
| Whether the text/email communications were properly authenticated | Pavlovich contends lack of direct link to him | State asserts circumstantial authentication via context and responses | Evidence properly authenticated; admissible |
| Whether the court properly denied the directed verdict on child solicitation | Pavlovich argues no direct solicitation to a minor via intermediary | State asserts intermediary communications satisfy solicitation statute | denial of directed verdict affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Laney v. State, 868 N.E.2d 561 (Ind.Ct.App. 2007) (information must state essential facts; not all details required)
- Isaacs v. State, 794 N.E.2d 1120 (Ind.Ct.App. 2003) (facially deficient information warrants dismissal)
- Fry v. State, 885 N.E.2d 742 (Ind.Ct.App. 2008) (authentication with reasonable probability suffices; not absolute proof)
- Lorraine v. Markel Am. Ins. Co., 241 F.R.D. 534 (D.Md. 2007) (the range of circumstantial authentication methods)
- Tienda v. State, 358 S.W.3d 633 (Tex.Crim.App. 2012) (various authentication methods for electronic messages (circumstantial))