# Brown v. State

> Indiana Supreme Court · April 29, 1969 · 252 Ind. 161

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9704341

## Case

- **Full name:** Brown v. State of Indiana
- **Court:** Indiana Supreme Court
- **Decided:** April 29, 1969
- **Citations:** 252 Ind. 161; 247 N.E.2d 76; 1969 Ind. LEXIS 339
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Jackson
- **Judges:** Hunter, Jackson
- **Cited by:** 48 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9704341

## Opinion text

Dissenting Opinion.
Jackson, J.
I dissent from the majority opinion on the narrow ground that the State of Indiana did not file any counter affidavit or affidavits to appellant’s Motion for Change of Venue from the County, nor did the State of Indiana offer evidence in rebuttal or repudiation of the testimony adduced in appellant’s behalf in support of his motion.
There is no dispute as to the fact that testimony was given and heard in support of appellant’s Motion for Change of Venue from the County. There is no dispute as to the fact that the State offered no evidence to contradict or offset such evidence.
The failure of the State to contradict the affidavit or affidavits and the evidence in support of the Motion for Change of Venue, in my opinion, constitutes an admission of the truth thereof.
The mere fact that the court after the hearing held that the defendant was not entitled to a change of venue from the county does not and can not change that admission. The record discloses that two witnesses testified on behalf of the appellant and that five exhibits [Numbers (1) to (5) inclusive] were introduced in support of appellant’s motion. Under the circumstances here present it is my opinion the denial of the Motion for Change of Venue constituted an abuse of discretion.
*182 The judgment should be reversed and remanded to the trial court with instructions to grant appellant’s Motion for Change of Venue from the County.
Note.—Reported in 247 N. E. 2d 76 .

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9704341. Public record. Not legal advice.