from the Marion Superior Court The Honorable Angela Davis,
Judge Trial Court Cause No. 49G16-1808-CM-28255
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT Matthew D. Anglemeyer Marion County
Public Defender Appellate Division Indianapolis, Indiana
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Curtis T. Hill, Jr. Attorney General
of Indiana Benjamin J. Shoptaw Deputy Attorney General
Randy Rogers appeals his conviction for invasion of privacy
as a class A misdemeanor. He raises one issue which we revise
and restate as whether the trial court properly admitted
certain text messages. We affirm.
and Procedural History
On August 25, 2018, Sierra Johnson and her best friend,
Jasmine Arnold, went to a club, left at some point, and went
to Jasmine's apartment. When they arrived, Rogers, who
lived with Jasmine, was present. Rogers became angry and
swung a pillow at Johnson and Jasmine. Johnson "got
up," attempted to diffuse the situation, and told Rogers
to calm down. Transcript Volume II at 10. He threw her into a
wall, which hurt her. She then "got up and . . . punched
him hard," went to the bathroom, and pushed her foot up
against the door, but Rogers kicked down the door.
Id. at 11. He pushed and grabbed Johnson, and shoved
her down three or four times. Johnson suffered the loss of a
nail, scratches on her chin, and bruises to her arm, back,
face, and eyes.
The State charged Rogers with Count I, domestic battery as a
class A misdemeanor, and Count II, battery resulting in
bodily injury as a class A misdemeanor. The State later filed
an amended information to add Count III, invasion of privacy
as a class A misdemeanor, and Count IV, attempted obstruction
of justice as a level 6 felony.
On November 15, 2018, the court held a bench trial. The State
moved to dismiss Count I, and the court granted the motion.
Johnson testified that she knew Rogers for about ten or
eleven years and to the events of August 25th. She also
testified that she received a subpoena to come to court for a
bench trial on September 20th and that, while she was in the
victim advocate's room, she received a text from Rogers
while there was a no contact order in place. The prosecutor
showed an exhibit to Johnson, and she indicated that it
contained "[t]exts from Randy" which accurately
reflected the text messages she received on September 20th.
The prosecutor moved to admit the messages as State's
Exhibit 28, and Rogers's counsel objected "as to
foundation" and argued: "For one thing we don't
know exactly who, although it says Randy at the top, that it
doesn't have any numbers and it also doesn't have
anything on the phone that identifies the phone as belonging
to [Johnson]. We would object as to speculation as to the
original and ask for the original on the phone."
Id. at 20. The court sustained the objection at that
time and allowed the prosecutor to ask follow-up questions.
The following exchange then occurred:
Q So did you - how did you receive these text messages?
A Via text from Randy.
Q And who's phone was it ...