Legal Opinion · Dissent

Thomas v. State

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided November 8, 2010No. 49A02-1002-CR-105Published

1DissentBradford, Judge

I respectfully dissent. Thomas violated a protective order when she told Smith to stop calling her and called him a "fagot" [sic] while they were in court. Tr. 7, 10, 16. The State charged Thomas with invasion of privacy for the violation, and the trial court convicted her in a bench trial The majority reverses Thomas's conviction after concluding that the institution of direct contempt proceedings was a more appropriate action. Although I agree that direct contempt proceedings would have been the more efficient and preferred remedy, I find nothing in the statute that precluded the State from…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Briggs v. Griffin Wheel Corp.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2006

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

Powered by the Exa API