Steven E. Malloch v. State of Indiana
2012 Ind. App. LEXIS 633
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Malloch was convicted of Class A felony child molesting involving his stepdaughter C.P.
- Two videorecorded interviews with Detective Lauer were admitted; Malloch ultimately confessed.
- Malloch claimed sexsomnia and that the confession was involuntary/coercive.
- A continuance to secure a sleep expert (Dr. Kaplish) was denied after mistrial.
- Malloch wrote an apology letter to C.P. which the State admitted into evidence.
- The jury requested to view the first interview; court permitted replay during deliberations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the continuance denial was error | Malloch contends denial prejudiced defense. | State asserts court acted within discretion given delay and unavailability. | No abuse of discretion; not prejudicial given circumstances. |
| Whether statements from the two interviews were admissible | Malloch argues Miranda and voluntariness were violated. | State asserts proper Miranda warnings and voluntary confessions. | Statements admissible; Miranda warnings proper and voluntary under totality of circumstances. |
| Whether failure to admonish about guilt-assertions was fundamental error | Malloch claims repeated guilt assertions by detective require admonition. | State argues no fundamental error; jury aware Reid Technique framed as elicitation. | Not fundamental error; no admonishment required given jury instructions and context. |
| Whether the apology letter was admissible | Letter obtained via coerive interrogation or as consequence of coercion. | Voluntariness shown by totality of circumstances; properly admitted. | Admissible; voluntary under the same Miranda framework. |
| Whether prosecutorial misconduct was fundamental error | State engaged in improper voir dire, impeachment, and closing remarks. | Any misconduct was isolated and not fundamental error; trial fair. | No fundamental error; overall trial was fair. |
Key Cases Cited
- Flowers v. State, 654 N.E.2d 1124 (Ind. 1995) (continuance denial distinguished; not reversible absent clear prejudice)
- Konopasek v. State, 946 N.E.2d 23 (Ind. 2011) (fundamental error standard for unpreserved error in trial)
- Carter v. State, 956 N.E.2d 167 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (invited error doctrine; admonishment not automatic cure)
- Clark v. State, 808 N.E.2d 1183 (Ind. 2004) (promises or leverage in confession; voluntariness analysis)
- Henry v. State, 738 N.E.2d 663 (Ind. 2000) (deception in interrogation does not automatically render confession inadmissible)
- Appleton v. State, 740 N.E.2d 122 (Ind. 2001) (line-by-line pretrial statement impeachment; harmless error standard)