996 N.E.2d 443
Ind. Ct. App.2013Background
- Hyser was charged with class A and class C child molesting based on December 2011 allegations; trial included in limine restrictions on Marner-related evidence.
- Hyser sought to present evidence that Marner manipulated J.M. to fabricate allegations in retaliation for Hyser reporting abuse.
- Hyser argued Collins and Key would corroborate retaliation; Detective Osterday would show the report originated from DCS involvement.
- The court excluded Marner-status evidence and limited retaliation-focused testimony; Hyser’s defense centered on Marner’s motive.
- Hyser was convicted on Counts I and II and sentenced to concurrent terms of 30 and 4 years; on appeal, the convictions were reversed for denial of a complete defense.
- The issue on appeal is whether Hyser was denied a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Hyser was denied a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense | Hyser: evidence from Collins, Key, Osterday and Marner’s sex-offender status were essential | State: evidence was irrelevant or hearsay and properly excluded | Reversed for denial of a complete defense |
Key Cases Cited
- Kubsch v. State, 784 N.E.2d 905 (Ind. 2003) (right to present a defense; due process considerations)
- Washington v. Texas, 388 U.S. 14 (1967) (confrontation and compulsory process rights to present witnesses)
- Allen v. State, 813 N.E.2d 349 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (harmless error standard; relevance of exculpatory evidence)
- Joyner v. State, 678 N.E.2d 386 (Ind. 1997) (evidence exclusion must not be harmless if it affects substantial justice)
- Dyson v. State, 692 N.E.2d 1374 (Ind. Ct. App. 1998) (hearsay exception for then-existing state of mind; bias and motive relevance)