Steven Eugene Ewing v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.), 48A05-1707-CR-1491

In 2015 Ewing was charged with operating a motor vehicle after forfeiture of license for life (Level 5 felony); he pleaded guilty under a plea agreement calling for community corrections for the executed portion.
December 12, 2016: court sentenced Ewing to five years, with 2½ years executed on community corrections and 2½ years suspended to probation.
March 15, 2017: community corrections filed notice alleging two violations — committing a new offense (battery against a public safety official, Level 6) and failing to report to the community justice center — and requested revocation and service of the balance in DOC.
At the revocation hearing the State presented no live witnesses but offered a police incident report (electronically signed by two officers under penalties of perjury) as State’s Exhibit 1; Ewing testified and disputed the report.
The trial court admitted the police report, found it sufficiently reliable, concluded Ewing committed both violations, and ordered 847 days at DOC followed by probation; Ewing appealed the admission of the report.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of police incident report in community corrections revocation	Report is trustworthy hearsay with officers’ electronic signatures and verifications; admissible in revocation hearings	Report is unreliable hearsay and deprived Ewing of right to cross-examine the officers	Court affirmed admission: report had substantial guarantees of trustworthiness (signed under penalties of perjury)
Right to challenge sufficiency regarding failure to report	State alternatively argued sufficient evidence supported failure-to-report violation	Ewing claimed defenses (e.g., was incarcerated elsewhere) and expressly disclaimed a sufficiency challenge on appeal	Court did not reach substantive sufficiency because admission of the report was dispositive; Ewing did not press sufficiency on appeal

Ackerman v. State, 51 N.E.3d 171 (Ind. 2016) (standard of review for evidentiary rulings and due-process claims in revocation proceedings)
Reyes v. State, 868 N.E.2d 438 (Ind. 2007) (Due Process applies to revocation but evidentiary rules are relaxed; hearsay admissible if substantially trustworthy)
Smith v. State, 971 N.E.2d 86 (Ind. 2012) (application of Reyes standard in community corrections revocation)
Whatley v. State, 847 N.E.2d 1007 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (probable cause affidavit prepared and sworn by arresting officer deemed admissible in revocation)
Baxter v. State, 774 N.E.2d 1037 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002) (unsigned, unverified police report lacks sufficient reliability)
Figures v. State, 920 N.E.2d 267 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (probable cause affidavit found unreliable where underlying criminal case had been dismissed)
Robinson v. State, 955 N.E.2d 228 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (erroneous to rely on affidavit rife with multiple layers of hearsay)