Phillip Griffin v. State of Indiana
997 N.E.2d 375
Ind. Ct. App.2013Background
- Griffin was confronted by Officer Miller while walking; Miller observed behavior suggesting possible instability and pursued Griffin after Griffin apparently threw shadow punches and ran away.
- Miller deployed a Taser after Griffin failed to stop; Griffin stood, then struck Miller as officers attempted handcuffs.
- Several officers arrived; Griffin was tackled, tased four times, and handcuffed.
- The State charged Griffin with two counts of resisting law enforcement and two counts of battery on a law enforcement officer.
- A bench trial convicted Griffin of battering Miller and resisting by disregarding the stop command; Griffin was sentenced to probation and ordered to 24 hours of community service in lieu of costs.
- The appellate court reversed the resisting conviction and the community-service order, but affirmed the battery conviction; the matter was remanded for costs-related issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence supports Griffin’s resisting-law-enforcement conviction | Griffin contends no probable cause or articulable suspicion existed to detain. | State contends resisting extends to fleeing any officer-ordered stop regardless of lawfulness. | Resisting conviction reversed. |
| Whether there was sufficient evidence Griffin battered an officer | Griffin argues self-defense negated the charge. | State contends elements of battery were proven beyond reasonable doubt. | Battery conviction affirmed. |
| Whether court could order community service in lieu of costs | Griffin argues no statutory authority for service in lieu of costs. | State relies on discretionary sentencing; indigency not bar to costs. | Order to perform community service in lieu of costs reversed; remanded for costs issue. |
Key Cases Cited
- Cole v. State, 878 N.E.2d 882 (Ind.Ct.App. 2007) (reaffirming that flight from a police order to stop can support resisting law enforcement regardless of order’s lawfulness)
- Dandridge v. State, 810 N.E.2d 746 (Ind.Ct.App. 2004) (order to stop governs flight prohibition independent of officer’s probable cause)
- Woods v. State, 547 N.E.2d 772 (Ind.1989) (Fourth Amendment detention must be justified by probable cause or reasonable suspicion)
- Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1985) (articulable suspicion supports brief detentions for investigation)
- Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544 (1980) (consensual encounters where subject remains free to disregard questions)
- Gaddie v. State, 991 N.E.2d 137 (Ind.Ct.App. 2013) (as long as no seizure under 4th Amendment, person may disregard order to stop)
- R.H. v. State, 916 N.E.2d 260 (Ind.Ct.App. 2009) (mentional health concerns contextual considerations for police-citizen encounters)
- Overstreet v. State, 724 N.E.2d 661 (Ind.Ct.App. 2000) (roadmap for types of police-citizen interactions)