MEMORANDUM DECISION
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), FILED
this Memorandum Decision shall not be Jul 12 2018, 9:06 am
regarded as precedent or cited before any
CLERK
court except for the purpose of establishing Indiana Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
the defense of res judicata, collateral and Tax Court
estoppel, or the law of the case.
APPELLANT PRO SE ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Charles A. Benson Jan M. Carroll
Bunker Hill, Indiana Kara Kapke
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Charles A. Benson, July 12, 2018
Appellant-Plaintiff, Court of Appeals Case No.
02A03-1711-CT-2865
v. Appeal from the Allen Superior
Court
News-Sentinel, Michael The Honorable David J. Avery,
Christman, Sheryl Krieg, Cindy Judge
Larson, Lisa Esquivel Long, Trial Court Cause No.
Appellees-Defendants 02D09-1702-CT-73
Baker, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A03-1711-CT-2865 | July 12, 2018 Page 1 of 4
[1] Charles Benson appeals the trial court’s order dismissing his complaint against
the Fort Wayne News-Sentinel newspaper, as well as its current and former
reporters and editors (collectively, News-Sentinel), for defamation. Finding no
error, we affirm.
[2] In January 2016, Benson was charged with attempted murder and related
offenses after shooting a Fort Wayne police officer. In the months following
that arrest, the News-Sentinel published multiple articles related to the criminal
proceedings. In the articles, the newspaper often referenced Benson’s lengthy
criminal history, including a 2014 murder charge. In one February 2016 article,
the News-Sentinel published a 2014 mugshot of Benson, noting in the caption
to the photograph that Benson was a former murder suspect facing a new
attempted murder charge. Benson was ultimately found guilty and found to be
an habitual offender; he was sentenced to over sixty-two years in prison. See
Benson v. State, 73 N.E.3d 198 (Ind. Ct. 2017) (affirming Benson’s convictions in
his direct appeal), trans. denied.
[3] On February 6, 2017, Benson filed a complaint against the News-Sentinel. The
News-Sentinel filed an answer, motion to stay, and motion for judgment on the
pleadings based on the Frivolous Prisoner Claim Statute. 1 Benson also filed a
separate lawsuit based on similar grounds against WANE-TV.2 On June 29,
1
Ind. Code § 34-58-1-1 et seq.
2
A separate opinion related to Benson’s lawsuit against WANE-TV is available at Benson v. WANE-TV 15,
No. 02A04-1711-CT-02866 (Ind. Ct. App. July 12, 2018).
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A03-1711-CT-2865 | July 12, 2018 Page 2 of 4
2017, the trial court held a consolidated hearing and status conference in the
two lawsuits. Benson appeared pro se by phone and did not object to the
consolidation. On September 18, 2017, the trial court issued an order granting
judgment in favor of the News-Sentinel. Benson now appeals.
[4] The General Assembly enacted the Frivolous Prisoner Claim Statute “to screen
and prevent abusive and prolific offender litigation in Indiana.” Smith v. Ind.
Dep’t of Corr., 883 N.E.2d 802, 804 (Ind. 2008). The statute requires trial courts
to screen complaints filed by offenders as soon as such complaints are
received.34 The trial court must determine whether the offender’s claim is
frivolous, is a claim upon which no relief may be granted, or is a claim that
seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune. I.C. § 34-58-1-2. A
claim is frivolous if, among other things, it lacks an arguable basis in law or
fact. Id.
[5] Truth is a complete defense to defamation. E.g., Melton v. Ousley, 925 N.E.2d
430, 437 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010); see also Journal-Gazette Co. v. Bandido’s, Inc., 712
N.E.2d 446, 457 (Ind. 1999) (holding that the plaintiff has the burden to prove
3
In this case, the trial court candidly acknowledged that it was “unaware of the need to conduct the review”
of Benson’s complaint upon receipt of the pleading. Appellees’ App. Vol. II p. 10. The News-Sentinel
brought the need for the review to the trial court’s attention, at which time it complied. We see no reason
that this delay should affect the outcome of this case.
4
Benson argues that the trial court erred by holding a consolidated hearing in this case and the case involving
WANE-TV. Initially, we note that under the Frivolous Prisoner Claim Statute, he is not entitled to a hearing
at all. I.C. § 34-58-1-1 et seq. Furthermore, he did not object to the consolidation below; consequently, he has
waived it. Finally, he does not explain how he was prejudiced by the consolidation. For all these reasons,
this argument is unavailing.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A03-1711-CT-2865 | July 12, 2018 Page 3 of 4
falsity). In this case, the statements complained of by Benson regarding his
criminal history, including a 2014 murder charge, are true. Indeed, Benson
does not argue, nor did he plead, otherwise. See Bandido’s, 712 N.E.2d at 456
(holding that to establish actual malice, which is a required element of
defamation claims, plaintiff must show that statements were false or made with
reckless disregard of whether they were false). He argues that the newspaper’s
use of a 2014 mugshot was inaccurate and/or misleading, but that does not
mean that it was false.5 Benson concedes that it was a picture of him, it just
happened to be a mugshot from two years earlier.
[6] Given that all the statements Benson highlights are true, and that the
photograph was of Benson, we find that the News-Sentinel properly found
refuge in the defense of truth. As a result, the trial court did not err by finding
Benson’s claims to be frivolous.6
[7] The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Kirsch, J., and Bradford, J., concur.
5
It has never been determined in Indiana whether publication of a photograph of a plaintiff can constitute
defamation. We assume solely for argument’s sake that it can, but leave the underlying question for another
day and a different case.
6
Benson also included claims related to the News-Sentinel’s 2014 reporting on a prior murder charge,
arguing that the newspaper defamed him by including information regarding his criminal history. The trial
court found that these claims are time-barred. Even if they were not time-barred, all of the information
reported by the News-Sentinel was true; therefore, Benson cannot establish defamation and the trial court
properly entered judgment in favor of the newspaper on these claims.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A03-1711-CT-2865 | July 12, 2018 Page 4 of 4