FILED
Dec 29 2016, 8:41 am
CLERK
Indiana Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
and Tax Court
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Kristin A. Mulholland Gregory F. Zoeller
Appellate Public Defender Attorney General of Indiana
Crown Point, Indiana
Katherine Modesitt Cooper
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Reginald Seville Harris, December 29, 2016
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
45A03-1605-CR-1168
v. Appeal from the Lake Superior
Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable Salvador Vasquez,
Appellee-Plaintiff. Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
45G01-1412-F5-41
Brown, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 45A03-1605-CR-1168 | December 29, 2016 Page 1 of 6
[1] Reginald Seville Harris appeals his conviction for battery against a public safety
official as a level 5 felony. Harris raises one issue which we revise and restate
as whether the trial court abused its discretion in admitting testimony regarding
a handgun. We affirm.
[2] The State charged Harris with battery against a public safety official as a level 5
felony and resisting law enforcement as a level 6 felony stemming from an
altercation that he and his girlfriend, Summer Snow, had with a Gary police
officer at Snow’s house. Snow and Harris were represented by the same
attorney and were tried together in a jury trial. At trial, the court admitted
Gary Police Officer Terry Peck’s testimony that Snow reported to him that
Harris was in her vehicle and refused to leave and that, when he asked Snow if
she had any weapons, she stated no. Officer Peck testified that he opened the
door and told Harris that he needed to leave the car, that Harris refused, that he
placed his hand on Harris’s arm and urged him to exit the car, and that Harris
grabbed his wrist, pulled him halfway into the car, and struck him in the face,
the side of his body and head, and his arms. Officer Peck testified he eventually
broke free from Harris, pulled him from the car, and placed him in handcuffs in
his police vehicle. He testified that Snow continued to shout at him despite
warnings to stop, that he eventually ordered her to place her hands on the car,
and that she refused.
[3] The court also admitted Officer Peck’s testimony that, when he tried to grab
Snow’s wrists, she pulled away from him and placed or tucked her hands
underneath her sweatshirt or the light jacket she was wearing, that when he
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 45A03-1605-CR-1168 | December 29, 2016 Page 2 of 6
grabbed one of her arms and placed that arm into cuffs he felt an object hit his
knee and the top of his boot, that he struggled a little longer to subdue Snow
and place her in handcuffs, and that he and another law enforcement officer
who arrived at the scene discovered that the object that had fallen to the ground
was a handgun, which belonged to Snow. The jury found Harris guilty as
charged. The trial court merged the count for resisting law enforcement with
the count for battery against a public safety official, entered judgment for
battery against a public safety official as a level 5 felony, and sentenced Harris
to two and one-half years, all suspended to probation.
[4] Harris argues the trial court erred in admitting evidence that Snow had a gun
during her altercation with Officer Peck and that the presence of the handgun
has no relevance to the question of his guilt or innocence. In an opinion issued
today in Snow’s case, we find that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in
admitting evidence of the presence of the gun at the joint trial. See Snow v. State,
No. 45A03-1605-CR-1175 (Ind. Ct. App. December 29, 2016). Harris does not
argue or point to the record to show that he sought and was denied a separate
trial. We note, similar to our observation in Snow, that the jury heard extensive
testimony regarding the actions of Harris which support his conviction, that it is
unlikely that the jury was significantly influenced by the testimony regarding
the discovery of Snow’s gun in light of the other evidence regarding Harris’s
actions, and that any error in admitting the testimony regarding the presence of
the gun was, at most, harmless.
[5] For the foregoing reasons, we affirm Harris’s conviction.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 45A03-1605-CR-1168 | December 29, 2016 Page 3 of 6
[6] Affirmed.
Bradford, J., concurs.
Vaidik, C.J., dissents with separate opinion.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 45A03-1605-CR-1168 | December 29, 2016 Page 4 of 6
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Kristin A. Mulholland Gregory F. Zoeller
Appellate Public Defender Attorney General of Indiana
Crown Point, Indiana
Katherine Modesitt Cooper
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Reginald Seville Harris, December 29, 2016
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
45A03-1605-CR-1168
v. Appeal from the Lake Superior
Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable Salvador Vasquez,
Appellee-Plaintiff. Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
45G01-1412-F5-41
Vaidik, Chief Judge, dissenting.
[7] I respectfully dissent. For the same reasons explained in my dissent today in
the case of Harris’ co-defendant, Summer Snow, I believe that the trial court
abused its discretion in admitting evidence about a handgun (which belonged to
Snow) that was found in Snow’s driveway after both Snow and Harris were in
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 45A03-1605-CR-1168 | December 29, 2016 Page 5 of 6
custody. Although the majority finds that the error is harmless in light of the
other evidence of Harris’ guilt, I disagree because the issue of guilt in this joint
trial boiled down to whose version of events to believe: Officer Peck’s version or
Snow and Harris’ version. The gun—which Snow never used or brandished
during the altercation and, in any event, which Snow legally possessed—and
the State’s emphasis on the gun, including the inflammatory (and misleading)
fact that it was “unregistered,” colored the jury’s perception of Snow and Harris
and led the jury to believe Officer Peck’s version of events. I would therefore
reverse Harris’ conviction for Level 5 felony battery against a public safety
official and remand this case for a new trial.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 45A03-1605-CR-1168 | December 29, 2016 Page 6 of 6