Legal Opinion · Dissent

Matthew Fiandt v. State of Indiana

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided October 11, 2013No. 32A01-1211-CR-496Published

1DissentNajam, Judge

I respectfully dissent and would vote to vacate Fiandt’s convictions and remand for a jury trial.

Fiandt was charged with two Class A misdemeanors and one Class B misdemeanor. A Class A misdemeanor carries a potential maximum term of one year imprisonment. Ind.Code § 35-50-3-2. The Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial applies to all “serious infractions.” Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145, 159-61, 88 S.Ct. 1444, 20 L.Ed.2d 491 (1968). The Supreme Court of the United States has held that “serious infractions” are crimes “where imprisonment for more than six months is authorized.” Baldwin v.…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Duncan v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Patton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
  3. Baldwin v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  4. Casselman v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1985
  5. Doughty v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1984

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API