FILED
MEMORANDUM DECISION May 24 2016, 9:25 am
CLERK
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), Indiana Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
this Memorandum Decision shall not be and Tax Court
regarded as precedent or cited before any
court except for the purpose of establishing
the defense of res judicata, collateral
estoppel, or the law of the case.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
David Paul Allen Gregory F. Zoeller
Hammond, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana
Angela N. Sanchez
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Basil C. Halkides, May 24, 2016
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Cause No.
45A03-1511-IF-2077
v. Appeal from the Lake Superior
Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable Nicholas J.
Appellee-Plaintiff. Schiralli, Judge
The Honorable Catheron Paras,
Magistrate
Trial Court Cause No.
45D07-1504-IF-3754
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 45A03-1511-IF-2077 | May 24, 2016 Page 1 of 5
Barnes, Judge.
Case Summary
[1] Basil Halkides appeals the trial court’s finding that he disregarded a traffic light,
a Class C infraction. We reverse.
Issue
[2] The dispositive issue is whether the State’s evidence was sufficient to prove
Halkides disregarded a traffic signal.
Facts
[3] On April 17, 2015, Halkides drove eastbound into an intersection in Lake
County. The traffic at that intersection was controlled by traffic lights, and
Halkides observed that the light directing him was yellow. Halkides testified, “I
never saw the light being red. I saw it only as yellow when I went into the
intersection.” Tr. p. 13. A vehicle travelling westbound through the same
intersection turned left and struck the driver’s side of Halkides’s vehicle.
[4] Munster Police Officer Gabe Isenblatter responded to the accident and later
cited Halkides for disregarding the traffic control device in violation of Indiana
Code Section 9-21-3-7. Officer Isenblatter testified he wrote the citation based
on something a witness at the scene of the accident said. That witness did not
testify at Halkides’s trial.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 45A03-1511-IF-2077 | May 24, 2016 Page 2 of 5
[5] On September 22, 2015, Halkides was tried in a bench trial. The trial court
found Halkides guilty of the infraction, fined him $10.00, and assessed court
costs. Halkides appeals.
Analysis1
[6] Traffic infractions are civil in nature. Rosenbaum v. State, 930 N.E.2d 72, 74
(Ind. Ct. App. 2010), trans. denied. As such, the State must prove the
commission of an infraction by a preponderance of the evidence. Id.
When reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence,
we will neither reweigh the evidence nor judge the credibility of
witnesses. Rather, we look to the evidence that best supports the
judgment and all reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom. If
there is substantial evidence of probative value supporting the
trial court’s judgment, it will not be overturned.
Id.
[7] Halkides contends the evidence is not sufficient to prove he committed an
infraction defined by Indiana Code Section 9-21-3-7. He further contends the
trial court abused its discretion by admitting into evidence hearsay and opinion
testimony. The State concedes that, “[t]he evidence did not establish that
1
Halkides notes some confusion related to the date on which the trial court’s judgment was entered in the
Chronological Case Summary and contends he timely filed his Notice of Appeal. The State does not argue
Halkides’s Notice of Appeal was untimely. We have reviewed the Chronological Case Summary and the
trial court’s order and conclude it is not necessary to address this issue.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 45A03-1511-IF-2077 | May 24, 2016 Page 3 of 5
Halkides committed the infraction,” and “acknowledges that this Court should
reverse the judgment of the trial court.” Appellee’s Br. pp. 6-7.
[8] In sum, the portions of Indiana Code Section 9-21-3-7 relevant to this matter
explain the meaning of the green, yellow, and red lights in a traffic signal and
set out the actions that are prohibited by vehicular traffic when those lights are
displayed. “Vehicular traffic facing a steady circular yellow or yellow arrow
signal is warned that the related green movement is being terminated and that a
red indication will be exhibited immediately thereafter.” Ind. Code § 9-21-3-
7(b)(2)(A). Except as otherwise provided, “vehicular traffic facing a steady
circular red or red arrow signal shall stop at a clearly marked stop line.” I.C. §
9-21-3-7(b)(3)(A). A person who violates Indiana Code Section 9-21-3-7
commits a Class C infraction. I.C. § 9-21-3-11.
[9] The uncontroverted evidence is that Halkides entered the intersection while the
traffic signal light was yellow. Although Officer Isenblatter testified he wrote
Halkides’s citation based on a witness’s statement, that witness did not testify.
Entering an intersection when a traffic light is yellow is not prohibited by
Indiana Code Section 9-21-3-7.
[10] Because the State concedes the sufficiency issue, and because we agree there is
no evidence of probative value to support the trial court’s judgment, we do not
reach Halkides’s evidentiary issue. Instead, we reverse the judgment of the trial
court.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 45A03-1511-IF-2077 | May 24, 2016 Page 4 of 5
Conclusion
[11] The State’s evidence was not sufficient to support the finding that Halkides
committed a Class C infraction. We reverse.
[12] Reversed.
Vaidik, C.J., and Mathias, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 45A03-1511-IF-2077 | May 24, 2016 Page 5 of 5