119 N.E.3d 1057
Ind.2019Background
- In 2016 Nathaniel Bennett pled guilty to Level 4 felony sexual misconduct with a minor and was placed on community corrections with a condition forbidding possession of "obscene matter" under Ind. Code § 35-49-2-1.
- A 2017 compliance check found a cell phone at Bennett’s home containing photos and videos of sexual activity; the State alleged a community corrections violation for possession of obscene matter.
- At the evidentiary hearing, the trial court found by a preponderance that Bennett possessed the phone and knew its contents and initially announced a finding of violation.
- At sentencing the same court stated it did not "necessarily" find paragraph two of the statutory obscenity definition (that the matter depicts sexual conduct in a patently offensive way) was met, but nonetheless revoked Bennett’s community corrections placement and ordered four years in the DOC.
- Bennett appealed; the Court of Appeals affirmed. The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer to resolve whether evidence was sufficient given the trial court’s conflicting statements.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence was sufficient to revoke Bennett’s community corrections placement for possessing "obscene matter" under the three-part statutory test | State: phone contents met statutory obscenity elements; trial court’s overall findings support revocation | Bennett: trial court’s explicit statement that paragraph two was "not necessarily met" negates an element and renders evidence insufficient (citing Kribs) | Reversed: trial court’s sentencing statement negated part of the statutory definition; evidence insufficient to support revocation; remand to correct the record |
| Whether the case is moot because Bennett was released from DOC | State: argues mootness | Bennett: adverse record effect persists; court should correct record | Court remanded to correct record despite State’s mootness argument |
Key Cases Cited
- Kribs v. State, 917 N.E.2d 1249 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (trial-court remarks negating an element require reversal)
- Cox v. State, 706 N.E.2d 547 (Ind. 1999) (standard of review for community corrections revocation equals probation revocation)
- Prewitt v. State, 878 N.E.2d 184 (Ind. 2007) (abuse-of-discretion standard; definition explained)