A TTORNEY FOR A PPELLANT A TTORNEYS FOR A PPELLEE

Suzy St. John Gregory F. Zoeller Indianapolis, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana
Kelly A. Miklos Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

_______________________ _______________________________________________________



# In the Indiana Supreme Court

_________________________________
No. 49S0 2

- 100 6

- CR

- 286

C HRISTIAN H OLLINSWORTH , Appellant (Defendant b e low),

v.

S TATE OF I NDIANA , Appellee (Plaint iff b e low)

.

_________________________________ Appeal from the Marion Superior Court, Criminal Division 13
,

No. 49 F13

- 0709

- CM

- 177170 The Honorable William Young, Judge

_________________________________
On Petition To Transfer from the Indiana Court of Appeals, No. 49 A02

- 0903

- CR

- 226

_________________________________

June 3 , 2010

Per Curiam.

Christian Hollinsworth appeals her conviction for driving while suspended as a class A

misdemeanor. See Ind. Code § 9

- 24

- 19

- 2

. She was sentenced to 365 days , exe cuted, and her2

driving privileges were suspended for an additional 365 days. The sentence was subsequently

modified on her motion, and the remaining executed portion of the sentence was suspended. 1

After the Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction and sentence, Hollinsworth petitioned
to transfer jurisdiction to this Court. See Appellate Rule 56(B).

Hollinsworth argues that comments by the trial court during the bench trial showed the

court was not impartial. For example, at the beginning of the tr ial, the court granted a recess so
the parties could discuss a plea agreement, but no agreement resulted , and the trial began. After

the State called its first witness, Hollinsworth informed the Court that she did not want a trial and

now wanted to accept the State’s proffered plea agreement. The Court exhibited impatience and

stated that if Hollinsworth were found guilty, “she’s going to jail for a year.” (Tr. p. 8.) The trial

court further stated, “I don’t know if I want to take your plea. I’d rather just go to trial, I think. I
don’t like being jerked around at all, all right ?” (Tr. p. 9.) Also, while reviewing Hollinsworth's
criminal history at sentencing, the trial court noted that Hollinsworth had been charged with theft
and battery whi le t he i nstant suspended license case had been pending

. When her attorney

state d , “Those are only alleged charges,” the trial court responded, “Sure they are.” (Tr. p. 23.)

Indiana Judicial Conduct Canon 2 requires a judge to “ perform the duties of judicial

off ice impartially, competently, and diligently. ” Judges must be “objective and open

- minded.”

Rule 2.2
, comment 1

. “A judge shall perform the duties of judicial office

. . . without bias or
prejudice.” R ule 2.3(A). “A judge shall be patient, dignified
, and courteous to litigants.” Rule

1 Hollinsworth was also found guilty of speeding in a zone set by local authority, but she does not challenge this on transfer.3

2.8(B). A judge shall disqualify himself or herself “ in any proceeding in which the judge’s

impartiality might reasonably be questioned ” including in circumstances when “ the judge has a
personal bias or prejudicial conce rning a party .” Rule 2.11(A).

The trial court’s behavior in this case did not meet these standards.

According ly , we grant transfer, vacate the Court of Appeals opinion reported at

Hollin s worth v. State
, 920 N.E.2d 679 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009), reverse t he conviction, and remand

for a new trial.

Shepard, C.J., and Dickson, Sullivan and Rucker, JJ., concur.
Boehm, J., agrees with the majority on the merits of this case but would deny transfer because the executed sentence in this case has already expired

.