William P. Stickrod, Appellant-Defendant,
State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff.
from the Tippecanoe Circuit Court The Honorable Thomas H.
Busch, Judge Trial Court Cause No. 79C01-1612-F5-167
Attorney for Appellant Bruce W. Graham Graham Law Firm, P.C.
Attorneys for Appellee Curtis T. Hill, Jr. Attorney General
of Indiana Justin F. Roebel Supervising Deputy Attorney
General Indianapolis, Indiana.
Barteau, Senior Judge.
of the Case
William P. Stickrod appeals his convictions of possession of
methamphetamine, a Level 5 felony; and possession of
paraphernalia, a Class C misdemeanor.We affirm in part, reverse in
part, and remand with instructions.
Stickrod raises three issues, which we restate as:
I. Whether the trial court erred in admitting evidence the
police found in Stickrod's house while serving two arrest
II. Whether the trial court violated Stickrod's right to
present evidence in his defense by barring a witness's
III. Whether Stickrod's two convictions for possession of
methamphetamine violate the federal constitutional
prohibition of double jeopardy.
and Procedural History
At 6:50 p.m. on December 17, 2016, Officer Grant Leroux of
the Lafayette Police Department and other officers arrived at
a house in Lafayette, Indiana. The house belonged to
Stickrod's mother, but Officer Leroux knew that Stickrod
lived there. The officers were there to execute warrants to
arrest Stickrod for failing to appear at court hearings in
two criminal cases.
We discuss the circumstances in more detail below, but in
summary Stickrod's girlfriend, Jessica Caliz,
eventually answered the door and told Officer Leroux that
Stickrod was not at home. The officers heard a
"thud" coming from the house's attached garage.
Caliz had previously lied to Officer Leroux about
Stickrod's whereabouts. In addition, Officer Leroux had
arrested Stickrod at that house a few weeks prior to December
17, 2016, after finding Stickrod hiding in the garage. The
officers entered the house and discovered Stickrod hiding in
the garage once again. They handcuffed him and, during a
search of his person, discovered a glasses case in a pants
pocket. The case contained a glass pipe and a small plastic
bag which in turn contained a white powdery substance.
Subsequent testing revealed the presence of .8 grams of
methamphetamine in the bag and methamphetamine residue on the
The State charged Stickrod with possession of
methamphetamine, a Level 6 felony; possession of
paraphernalia, a Class C misdemeanor; and possession of
methamphetamine, a Level 5 felony. The State further alleged
that Stickrod was an habitual offender. Stickrod filed a
motion to suppress all evidence that the State obtained after
entering his home. The trial court held a hearing and denied
The court bifurcated the case, choosing to first submit the
Level 6 felony and Class C misdemeanor charges to a jury.
After the State rested, Stickrod's attorney informed the
court outside the presence of the jury that he would not
present testimony by Caliz because he believed Caliz would
commit perjury on the stand. Stickrod disagreed with his
attorney's decision and told the court that Caliz's
testimony was "imperative for [his] defense." Tr.
Vol. 2, p. 156. Stickrod further asked the court to fire his
attorney. The court denied Stickrod's request to fire his
attorney and did not allow Caliz to testify.
The jury determined Stickrod was guilty of the Level 6 felony
and the Class C misdemeanor, and the court entered a judgment
of conviction. Stickrod waived his right to a jury trial on
the Level 5 felony and the habitual offender sentencing
enhancement. During the second phase of trial, Stickrod
pleaded guilty to the Level 5 felony and to being an habitual
At sentencing, the court dismissed the habitual offender
enhancement and imposed a sentence on the Level 6 felony, the
Level 5 felony, and the Class C misdemeanor. The court
further held the Level 6 ...