961 N.E.2d 34
Ind. Ct. App.2012Background
- Nowling was convicted of possession of methamphetamine as a class D felony in Indiana and the conviction was affirmed in Nowling v. State, 955 N.E.2d 854 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011).
- Nowling petitioned for rehearing to challenge reliance on William Bowles’s testimony about lab results for the pen hull evidence.
- At trial, Nowling moved to suppress evidence; a continuing objection to the suppression motion and to statements was granted.
- During Bowles’s testimony, the State moved to admit State's Exhibit 4 (certificate of analysis); Nowling objected only to the initial admission of the exhibit, and later stated no objection to the exhibit and its publication.
- Exhibit 4 showed the pen hull contained methamphetamine and cocaine, based on Bowles’s analysis.
- The court granted rehearing for the limited purpose of clarifying analysis and affirmed the original opinion, relying on Hayworth v. State to conclude Nowling waived the objection by stating no objection to Exhibit 4.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Waiver of objection to Exhibit 4 by continuing objection | Nowling contends continuing objection preserved the challenge | State argues waiver occurred when Nowling said no objection to Exhibit 4 | Waiver occurred; no further appellate challenge to Exhibit 4. |
| Survival of continuing objection to Bowles’s testimony after Exhibit 4 admission | Continuing objection should cover subsequent testimony | Hayworth permits waiver via express no-objection statement | Waiver; objections not preserved on appeal. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hayworth v. State, 904 N.E.2d 684 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (continuing objection followed by 'No objection' leads to waiver of objections to subsequent exhibits)
- Nowling v. State, 955 N.E.2d 854 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (affirmed conviction; discussed continuing objection and waiver issues)