State v. Clanton, 3-582A100
| Docket Nº | No. 3-582A100 |
| Citation | 441 N.E.2d 44 |
| Case Date | October 26, 1982 |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Indiana |
Page 44
v.
Norman CLANTON, JR. Appellee (Defendant Below).
Third District.
Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen., Indianapolis, Jack F. Crawford, Pros. Atty., Lake County, by Robert G. Berger, Deputy Pros. Atty., Crown Point, for appellant.
Susan K. Carpenter, Public Defender, Paul Levy, Deputy Public Defender, Indianapolis, for appellee.
STATON, Judge.
Norman Clanton, Jr. filed a petition for post-conviction relief. The trial court granted the petition and ordered a new trial. The State appeals. 1 The sole issue on appeal is whether a new trial is warranted by the admission of testimony that the victim identified Clanton prior to trial from photographs at the police station.
Reversed and remanded to the trial court with instructions to reinstate the original judgment and sentence.
Clanton was convicted of robbery and sentenced on May 17, 1977 to a term of ten to twenty-five years. The judgment was affirmed by this Court on November 27, 1978. On October 20, 1980, Clanton filed a petition for post-conviction relief. The evidence showed that, at Clanton's trial, testimony was admitted which described how the victim of the robbery identified Clanton's photograph at the police station. Throughout this testimony, references were made to "pictures" or "photos" or "photographs" being shown to the victim at the police station. 2 The evidence also showed
Page 45
that defense counsel objected to the testimony, asserting that such references were suggestive. The trial court granted Clanton's petition for post-conviction relief.The State contends that no reference to "mug shots" was made at the trial and that therefore the trial court erroneously based its decision on the prejudicial effect of the introduction of or reference to mug shots during trial. We agree. Because mug shots may suggest to the jury that the defendant has a criminal record, they are generally not admissible. Blue v. State (1968), 250 Ind. 249, 235 N.E.2d 471; Vaughn v. State (1939), 215 Ind. 142, 19 N.E.2d 239. However, mug shots may be admitted into evidence if the photograph is not unduly prejudicial and has substantial independent value as evidence. Strong v. State (1982), Ind., 435 N.E.2d 969, 972; Gray v. State (1978), 268 Ind. 177, 374 N.E.2d 518. Even the mere reference to "mug shots" may require reversal, Fox v. State (1980), Ind.App., 399 N.E.2d 827, unless the reference was inadvertent or the other evidence of guilt was strong. Phillips v. State (1977), 174 Ind.App. 570, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jackson v. State, No. 382S73
...does not connote or suggest a prior criminal record as does "mug shot." State v. Clanton, (1982) Ind.App., 441 N.E.2d 44, 45, rehearing denied 443 N.E.2d 1204. It was defense counsel who, during cross-examination, asked Reith if he had looked through some "mug books." Th......
-
State v. Clanton, No. 3-582A100
...photographs was without substantial independent probative value." (Petition at 2). The Petition for Rehearing is denied, Ind.App., 441 N.E.2d 44. I. Clanton contends that, in a post-conviction relief "the trial judge is the sole judge of the weight of the evidence and only where P......
-
Dunsizer v. State, No. 27S00-8706-CR-575
...be one hundred eighty pounds. Appellant argues that to allow the police officer to so testify violated State v. Clanton (1982), Ind.App., 441 N.E.2d 44, in that it is tantamount to introducing a mug shot which indicates that appellant has a prior police record. Although appellant's trial co......
-
Jackson v. State, 382S73
...books." The word "photograph" does not connote or suggest a prior criminal record as does "mug shot." State v. Clanton, (1982) Ind.App., 441 N.E.2d 44, 45, rehearing denied 443 N.E.2d 1204. It was defense counsel who, during cross-examination, asked Reith if he had looked through some "mug ......
-
State v. Clanton, 3-582A100
...file photographs was without substantial independent probative value." (Petition at 2). The Petition for Rehearing is denied, Ind.App., 441 N.E.2d 44. I. Clanton contends that, in a post-conviction relief "the trial judge is the sole judge of the weight of the evidence and only where Page 1......
-
Dunsizer v. State, 27S00-8706-CR-575
...be one hundred eighty pounds. Appellant argues that to allow the police officer to so testify violated State v. Clanton (1982), Ind.App., 441 N.E.2d 44, in that it is tantamount to introducing a mug shot which indicates that appellant has a prior police record. Although appellant's trial co......