Stephen Roberts v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.), 49A04-1609-CR-2011

On Dec. 5, 2015, Officer Kinsey observed Stephen Roberts staggering in the middle of West Washington Street, creating a traffic hazard.
Officer Kinsey noted glassy, bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, and a strong smell of alcohol; Roberts was placed in the patrol car and taken to the station.
Roberts told the officer he needed to get back to Bloomington after release from a VA hospital; he did not report any assault at that time.
The State charged Roberts with Class B misdemeanor public intoxication; at bench trial Roberts testified he had been attacked by two unknown assailants and staggered into traffic to avoid being robbed.
Roberts asserted the defense of necessity (to avoid robbery); the State presented no rebuttal evidence and relied on its case-in-chief.
The trial court convicted Roberts; he appealed arguing the State failed to disprove his necessity defense beyond a reasonable doubt.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Roberts)	Held
Whether the State disproved necessity beyond a reasonable doubt	The State argues its case-in-chief (officer observations and Roberts’ failure to report an attack) negates elements of necessity	Roberts contends he fled into traffic to avoid being robbed—necessity excuses the public intoxication	Court held the State presented sufficient evidence to negate at least one element of necessity; conviction affirmed

Clemons v. State, 996 N.E.2d 1282 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (defines affirmative-defense nature of necessity)
Dozier v. State, 709 N.E.2d 27 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999) (articulates six-element necessity test and burdens for disproving it)