K.C. & K.C., Appellants-Respondents,
State of Indiana, Appellee-Petitioner.
from the Marion Superior Court The Honorable Marilyn Moores,
Judge The Honorable Gary Chavers, Magistrate Trial Court
Cause Nos. 49D09-1509-JD-1759, 49D09-1511-JD-2031
Attorney for Appellants Joel M. Schumm Indianapolis, Indiana
Attorneys for Appellee Curtis T. Hill, Jr. Attorney General
P. Babbs Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana
In this consolidated appeal, Ki.C. appeals the juvenile
court's true findings that he committed delinquent acts
which, if committed by an adult, would constitute battery on
a public safety official as a level 6 felony and forcibly
resisting law enforcement as a class A misdemeanor. Ke.C.
appeals the juvenile court's true finding that he
committed a delinquent act which, if committed by an adult,
would constitute resisting law enforcement as a class A
misdemeanor. Ki.C. and Ke.C. (collectively, the
"Respondents") raise three issues which we
consolidate and restate as whether the juvenile court abused
its discretion in admitting certain evidence due to
violations of the Respondents' rights under Article 1,
Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution. We affirm.
and Procedural History
On September 24, 2015, Indianapolis Public Schools Police
Department ("IPSP") Officers John Dunker and
Christopher Caldwell were on duty at Arsenal Technical High
School when Officer Dunker received a radio call about a
possible stolen phone. He proceeded to Allen Hall, and
faculty member Tony Henderson told him that a female
student's "Windows phone" had been stolen and
that no one had left the classroom and no one had
reentered. Transcript at 4. Officer Dunker proceeded
to conduct pat-down searches of the students who were in the
classroom by taking one student at a time out into the
hallway and patting down the students' exterior clothing.
Soon after, Officer Caldwell arrived to assist with the
After patting down at least one student and not finding the
phone, Officer Dunker re-entered the classroom and "was
greeted by [Ki.C.] yelling, he is not f ----- touching me. He
is not touching me, he is not searching me."
Id. at 10-11. Officer Dunker patted down another
student, then came to Ki.C. who remained seated and stated
that he would not allow Officer Dunker to search him. Officer
Dunker asked Ki.C. to stand, and he refused to do so. After
Officer Dunker moved the desk, Ki.C. stood, took his jacket
off, and began to walk away, Officer Dunker placed his hand
on Ki.C.'s shoulder, and Ki.C. "threw his arm back
in an aggressive manor [sic] . . . ." Id.
Officer Dunker went to grab Ki.C., who then balled his fist
and swung it at Officer Dunker several times. Officer Dunker
then placed Ki.C. on a ledge in the back of the classroom,
and Ki.C. punched Officer Dunker in the ribs with his fist
and with a limestone-based trophy. At that point, Officer
Dunker took Ki.C. to the ground.
Ke.C., who is Ki.C.'s twin brother, observed Ki.C. and
Officer Dunker on the ground, and Officer Caldwell prevented
Ke.C. from moving toward them. Ke.C. tried to evade Officer
Caldwell, but he was taken to the ground by the officer.
During this encounter, Officer Caldwell believed that Ke.C.
was hitting him in the leg. Officer Caldwell attempted to
place Ke.C. in handcuffs, but Ke.C. kept avoiding the
handcuffs by moving his arms and trying to pull away.
Eventually, both Ki.C. and Ke.C. were placed in handcuffs and
escorted by the officers to the IPSP office on the Arsenal
On September 25, 2015, the State alleged Ki.C. to be a
delinquent child for acts constituting the following crimes
if committed by an adult: Count 1, battery against a public
safety official as a level 6 felony; Count 2, battery by
bodily waste as a level 6 felony; Count 3, battery against a
public safety official as a level 6 felony; Counts 4 and 5,
intimidation as level 6 felonies; and Count 6, resisting law
enforcement as a class A misdemeanor. On November 13, 2015,
the State alleged Ke.C. to be a delinquent child for
committing two counts of resisting law enforcement which
would be class A misdemeanors if committed by an adult.
On March 14, 2016, the juvenile court held a consolidated
fact-finding hearing for Ki.C. and Ke.C. Early in the
testimony of Officer Dunker, defense counsel asked
preliminary questions and made an oral motion to suppress the
evidence of the events that occurred after the attempted
pat-down search. Defense counsel asked Officer Dunker about
the myIPS Student Code of Conduct, and Officer Dunker
testified that "these rules are not necessarily over us,
" that the officers "operate by our own standard
operating procedure, " and that "we are separate
from the school rules." Transcript at 6. After having
him read certain provisions contained in the Code of Conduct
regarding personal technology devices such as smartphones and
student searches, defense counsel moved to suppress his
testimony as follows:
The Officer acting in the capacity of a member of the State
in his role as a policeman overstepped his authority; in
fact, violated both of my client's [sic] Constitutional
rights to be free from unlawful searches and seizures. . . .
We would ask that everything that occurred after the officer
had the idea that he was going to search everyone in the
classroom be suppressed and that in fact may result in a
dismissal of the charges against both of these boys.
Id. at 8-9. The court denied the motion. Counsel
again objected during Officer Caldwell's testimony,
citing his previous argument, which the court overruled. The
court also admitted into evidence as Respondents' Exhibit
A the myIPS Student Code of Conduct, which includes
provisions regarding ...