Everling v. State

Summary

The Indiana Supreme Court reviewed Steven W. Everling’s convictions for child molesting and sexual misconduct with a minor after granting transfer from the Court of Appeals. The court held that the trial judge’s cumulative comments, courtroom conduct, and procedural rulings demonstrated partiality and deprived Everling of a fair trial. The convictions were reversed and the case was remanded for a new trial.

Holdings

1. The cumulative effect of the trial judge's disparaging comments, adversarial demeanor, one-sided interventions, mistaken commentary, and procedural rulings demonstrated partiality and deprived Everling of a fair trial before an impartial judge.
2. Exclusion of the witnesses who would testify about the alleged victim's reputation for untruthfulness was prejudicial because credibility was central to the defense theory.
3. Excluding Dr. Merk's testimony was an abuse of discretion because his testimony offered an important alternative explanation for the physical evidence, the State had not yet begun its case-in-chief, and a short continuance could have cured any surprise.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial judge's comments, demeanor, evidentiary rulings, and procedural rulings, considered cumulatively, deprived Everling of a fair trial before an impartial judge.
2. Whether exclusion of defense witnesses, including witnesses concerning the alleged victim's truthfulness and a medical expert who would challenge the State's physical-evidence theory, was prejudicial and constituted an abuse of discretion.
3. Whether the convictions should be reversed and the matter remanded for a new trial.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded