Clark County Council and Clark County Auditor v. Daniel F. Donahue, Cecile A. Blau, Vicki Carmichael, and Steven M. Fleece

Summary

The Indiana Supreme Court held that money in a county supplemental adult probation services fund may be used only to supplement adult probation services and probation officer salaries, and may not replace other probation funding or pay unrelated court expenses. The court also held that the county fiscal body, rather than the judges, has authority to appropriate funds within those statutory limits. The case was remanded with directions for the Clark County Council to appropriate or return amounts improperly expended.

Holdings

1. Indiana Code section 35-38-2-1 permits money in the county supplemental adult probation services fund to be used only to supplement adult probation services and to supplement probation-officer salaries; it may not be used for unrelated court expenses.
2. Supplemental adult probation services funds may not be used to replace probation-service expenses previously paid from the county general fund.
3. The county fiscal body has authority to determine how much to appropriate from the fund in a given year and how to expend the money within the statutory purposes; its role is not purely ministerial.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Indiana Code section 35-38-2-1 permits a county to use the supplemental adult probation services fund for court expenses unrelated to probation.
2. Whether the statute permits the fund to replace probation-service funding previously provided from the county general fund.
3. Whether the county fiscal body has only a ministerial role or instead possesses discretion to determine the amount and manner of appropriations within the statutory limitations.

Disposition

remanded