Cissna v. State, No. 1--476A60
| Docket Nº | No. 1--476A60 |
| Citation | 170 Ind.App. 437, 352 N.E.2d 793 |
| Case Date | August 25, 1976 |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Indiana |
Page 793
v.
STATE of Indiana, Plaintiff-Appellee.
Rehearing Denied Oct. 1, 1976.
Page 794
John D. Clouse, Evansville, for defendant-appellant.
Theodore L. Sendak, Atty. Gen., Elmer Lloyd Whitmer, Deputy Atty. Gen., Indianapolis, for plaintiff-appellee.
ROBERTSON, Chief Judge.
David Lee Cissna is appealing his conviction by a jury of entering to commit a felony. None of the [170 Ind.App. 438] issues raised presents reversible error, and we accordingly affirm.
The facts show that Ralph Williams lived approximately 150 to 300 yards from the railroad tracks in Vanderburgh County. On July 10, 1975, at approximately 4:20 P.M., he observed two people breaking into a railroad car that was standing on the tracks. He notified the police who arrived at the scene within four or five minutes. One of the officers, Steven Cain, testified that he drove along the tracks and approached the railroad car that was being entered. As soon as he stopped his car, he got out and observed the defendant, David Cissna, peering at him from beneath the railroad car. Cissna and two companions turned and fled. At this time, Officer Cain radioed a description of the subjects, and within fifteen minutes Cissna was apprehended and returned to the scene.
Officer Scales testified that he was called to investigate a crime occurring at an L & N boxcar in Vanderburgh County. He arrived at the scene, observed that the car broken into contained boxes marked 'Color TV's', and noticed that one of the boxes behind the door that had been broken open was slanted at an angle as if it had been shifted prior to being removed.
Cissna argues first that the trial court committed reversible error when it allowed the State to violate a voir dire order. On November 7, 1975 the trial judge ordered both parties to comply with certain prerequisites relating to voir dire. The order required both parties to file with the court certain specifications relating to the questions
Page 795
that they would ask the jurors prior to being sworn. On November 12, 1975, defendant, by his attorney, complied with the voir dire order. The State failed to comply with the order, and the defendant strenuously objected throughout the remainder of the proceedings.The purpose of voir dire is to determine whether a prospective juror is able to deliberate fairly on the issue of guilt, [170 Ind.App. 439] Lamb v. State (1976), Ind., 348 N.E.2d 1, and a trial judge has wide discretion in conducting voir dire. White v. State (1975), Ind., 330 N.E.2d 84. When an act has been committed to the trial court's discretion, it will be reversed only upon a showing of a manifest abuse of such discretion and a denial to the complaining party of a fair trial. Meuhlman v. Keilman (1971), 257 Ind. 100, 272 N.E.2d 591. Cissna has failed to show how he was denied a fair trial or how the purpose of voir dire was thwarted.
The next allegation of error is that the trial court, over the objection of Cissna, permitted Cissna's mother to testify. Specifically, Cissna alleges that the error is reversible because, if there is not at present, there should be a parent-child privilege. IC 34--1--14--5 (Burns Code Ed. 1974), grants an evidentiary privilege to persons insane at the time they are offered as witnesses, children under 10, attorneys, physicians, clergymen, and spouses. Reporters have a privilege not to be compelled to disclose any source of information procured or obtained in the course of employment. IC 34--3--5--1 (Burns Code Ed. 1974). Counselors duly appointed as such in any public school system are immune from disclosing any privileged or confidential communication made to such counselor by a pupil. IC 20--6--20--2 (Burns Code Ed. 1974). Likewise, a certified public accountant is granted a privilege as to information derived from or as the result of professional services rendered by him. IC 25--2--1--23 (Burns Code Ed. 1974). A probation officer has a conditional privilege with respect to information obtained by him in the course of his employment. IC 33--12--2--22 (Burns Code Ed. 1974). Lastly, a registered psychologist is absolutely prohibited from revealing information acquired by him in the course of his professional capacity, except under specific and limited circumstances. IC 25--33--1--17 (Burns Code Ed. 1974).
There is no such privilege conferred upon the parent-child relationship. Cissna cites no authority (except 'Natural Law') [170 Ind.App. 440] for the proposition that there is or should be such a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Grand Jury, In re, Nos. 95-7354
...99 Ill.2d 262, 75 Ill.Dec. 682, 457 N.E.2d 1241 (1983); Gibbs v. State, 426 N.E.2d 1150 Page 1148 (Ind.Ct.App.1981); Cissna v. State, 170 Ind.App. 437, 352 N.E.2d 793 (1976); State v. Gilroy, 313 N.W.2d 513 (Iowa 1981); State v. Willoughby, 532 A.2d 1020, 1022 (Me.1987); State v. Delong, 45......
-
In re Jury, No. 95–7354
...v. Sanders, 99 Ill.2d 262, 75 Ill.Dec. 682, 457 N.E.2d 1241 (1983); Gibbs v. State, 426 N.E.2d 1150 (Ind.Ct.App.1981); Cissna v. State, 170 Ind.App. 437, 352 N.E.2d 793 (1976); State v. Gilroy, 313 N.W.2d 513 (Iowa 1981); State v. Willoughby, 532 A.2d 1020, 1022 (Me.1987); State v. Delong, ......
-
U.S. v. Red Elk, CR 96-30031.
...390 Mass. 357, 455 N.E.2d 1203 (1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1068, 104 S.Ct. 1421, 79 L.Ed.2d 746 (1984); Cissna v. State, 170 Ind.App. 437, 352 N.E.2d 793 8. Greenberg, like Agosto, has not been followed by any federal appellate court. See Unemancipated Minor Child, 949 F.Supp. at 1490-98......
-
Babets v. Secretary of Executive Office of Human Services
...745, 749, 130 Cal.Rptr. 913 (1976); People v. Sanders, 99 Ill.2d 262, 271, 75 Ill.Dec. 682, 457 N.E.2d 1241 (1983); 6 Cissna v. State, 170 Ind.App. 437, 439-440, 352 N.E.2d 793 (1976); State v. Gilroy, 313 N.W.2d 513, 518 (Iowa 1981). Cf. Petition for the Promulgation of Rules, 395 Mass. 16......
-
Grand Jury, In re, Nos. 95-7354
...99 Ill.2d 262, 75 Ill.Dec. 682, 457 N.E.2d 1241 (1983); Gibbs v. State, 426 N.E.2d 1150 Page 1148 (Ind.Ct.App.1981); Cissna v. State, 170 Ind.App. 437, 352 N.E.2d 793 (1976); State v. Gilroy, 313 N.W.2d 513 (Iowa 1981); State v. Willoughby, 532 A.2d 1020, 1022 (Me.1987); State v. Delong, 45......
-
In re Jury, No. 95–7354
...v. Sanders, 99 Ill.2d 262, 75 Ill.Dec. 682, 457 N.E.2d 1241 (1983); Gibbs v. State, 426 N.E.2d 1150 (Ind.Ct.App.1981); Cissna v. State, 170 Ind.App. 437, 352 N.E.2d 793 (1976); State v. Gilroy, 313 N.W.2d 513 (Iowa 1981); State v. Willoughby, 532 A.2d 1020, 1022 (Me.1987); State v. Delong, ......
-
U.S. v. Red Elk, CR 96-30031.
...390 Mass. 357, 455 N.E.2d 1203 (1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1068, 104 S.Ct. 1421, 79 L.Ed.2d 746 (1984); Cissna v. State, 170 Ind.App. 437, 352 N.E.2d 793 8. Greenberg, like Agosto, has not been followed by any federal appellate court. See Unemancipated Minor Child, 949 F.Supp. at 1490-98......
-
Babets v. Secretary of Executive Office of Human Services
...745, 749, 130 Cal.Rptr. 913 (1976); People v. Sanders, 99 Ill.2d 262, 271, 75 Ill.Dec. 682, 457 N.E.2d 1241 (1983); 6 Cissna v. State, 170 Ind.App. 437, 439-440, 352 N.E.2d 793 (1976); State v. Gilroy, 313 N.W.2d 513, 518 (Iowa 1981). Cf. Petition for the Promulgation of Rules, 395 Mass. 16......