Opinion

Greer v. State

  • 669 N.E.2d 751
Court
Indiana Court of Appeals
Filed
Oct 15, 1996
Status
Published
Author
Hoffman
On the bench
Garrard, Sullivan, Hoffman
Cited by
7 cases
Authority
More cited than 9.2%

Vacated by Greer v. State, 1997 Ind. LEXIS 161 (1997)

The opinion

HOFFMAN, Judge,

dissenting.

I respectfully dissent. As noted by the majority, leave to file a belated praecipe is permitted only when a direct appeal is taken from a conviction. I do not agree that the decision in Byrd v. State, 592 N.E.2d 690, 691-692 (Ind.1992) is controlling. Byrd was decided in 1992 prior to the rule change. The version of the rule in effect at the time *762 Byrd was decided did not confine consideration to appeals from convictions. The appeal from a probation violation is not a direct appeal from a conviction.

The State could not waive the right to contest jurisdiction, where as here the rule does not confer any jurisdiction. The timely filing of a praecipe is a jurisdictional matter and an absolute precondition to an appeal. Board of Com'rs of Lake County v. Foster, 614 N.E.2d 949, 950 (Ind.Ct.App.1993). The failure to timely file the praccipe is fatal to Greer's purported appeal from a probation violation. I would dismiss the appeal.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.