Sutton v. State, 031416 INCA, 01A05-1507-PC-882

Docket Nº:01A05-1507-PC-882
Opinion Judge:Robb, Judge.
Party Name:Christopher Sutton, Appellant-Defendant, v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
Attorney:ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT Stephen T. Owens Public Defender of Indiana Kelly A. Kelly Deputy Pubic Defender Indianapolis, Indiana ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Gregory F. Zoeller Attorney General of Indiana Ian McLean Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana
Judge Panel:Barnes, J., and Altice, J., concur.
Case Date:March 14, 2016
Court:Court of Appeals of Indiana
 
FREE EXCERPT

Christopher Sutton, Appellant-Defendant,

v.

State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.

No. 01A05-1507-PC-882

Court of Appeals of Indiana

March 14, 2016

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

Appeal from the Adams Circuit Court Trial Court Cause No. 01C01-1201-PC-1 The Honorable Chad E. Kukelhan, Judge

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT Stephen T. Owens Public Defender of Indiana Kelly A. Kelly Deputy Pubic Defender Indianapolis, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Gregory F. Zoeller Attorney General of Indiana Ian McLean Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Robb, Judge.

Case Summary and Issue

[1] Following a jury trial, Christopher Sutton was convicted of child molesting as a Class A felony. He subsequently filed a petition for post-conviction relief alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. During the course of post-conviction proceedings, Sutton served the State with four proposed Non-Party Requests for Production of Documents and Subpoenas Duces Tecum pursuant to Indiana Trial Rule 34(C). The requests were directed at four medical providers and sought the child victim's medical records. The State objected to the requests. The post-conviction court sustained the State's objection but certified the matter for interlocutory appeal. We accepted jurisdiction. Concluding the post-conviction court's ruling will not prejudice Sutton's ineffective assistance claim, we affirm the post-conviction court's order quashing Sutton's subpoenas.

Facts and Procedural History

[2] Many of the facts relevant to Sutton's conviction were recounted by this court on direct appeal:

Seven-year-old Z.H. lived with her mother S.C, her three-year old brother, and thirty-two-year-old Sutton. S.C. and Sutton had lived together for "about 2, 2 years, " and Z.H. called Sutton "daddy." On July 8, 2008, Z.H. and her brother were in bed with S.C. and Sutton. Z.H. had an issue with wetting herself at night and wore a pull-up diaper. S.C, who is a sound sleeper, did not hear Sutton leave the next morning.

S.C. woke up around 7:00 a.m., and Z.H. was already awake. Z.H. went into the bathroom and her mother told her to take off her clothes so that she could take a bath. Z.H. told S.C. that her vagina hurt. S.C. told Z.H. that she "probably peed [her] pants, um go ahead and take your clothes off you'll be fine, " and Z.H. stated "no mom my vagina hurts because . . . daddy stuck his penis in my vagina."

Without talking to Z.H. about what had happened, SC called her mother. S.C.'s mother and sister arrived, and her sister called the police. Later that day, Danielle Goewert of the Fort Wayne Child Advocacy Center interviewed Z.H. and the interview was recorded. Z.H. informed Goewert that Sutton put his penis in her vagina the previous night. Z.H. stated that Sutton was asleep because his eyes were closed. Z.H. stated that Sutton's penis touched her pull-up diaper and that her pull-up diaper went into her vagina. Z.H. also stated that her brother once smacked her in her vagina.

After her interview, Z.H. was examined at the Fort Wayne Sexual Assault Treatment Center by Sharon Robinson, the chief administrative officer and a sexual assault nurse examiner. Robinson asked Z.H. what had happened to her, and Z.H. stated that her "daddy put his penis inside [her] vagina and that he pushed [her] pull up inside with his penis . . . ." Robinson observed Z.H.'s...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP