Title: Schuchman v. State
Citation: 236 N.E.2d 830, 250 Ind. 408
Docket Number: 30,855
State: Indiana
Issuer: Indiana Supreme Court
Date: May 16, 1968

250 Ind. 408 (1968)
236 N.E.2d 830
SCHUCHMAN
v.
STATE OF INDIANA.
No. 30,855.

Supreme Court of Indiana.
Filed May 16, 1968.
Ferdinand Samper and Forrest Bowman, Jr., of Indianapolis, for appellant.
John J. Dillon, Attorney General, Raymond I. Klagiss, and Richard Bennett, Deputies Attorney General, for appellee.
JACKSON, J.
Appellant and a co-defendant, Jerry Allen Hostettler, were charged by indictment with the crime of abortion. The defendants entered pleas of not guilty. Trial was to a jury resulting in the conviction of the defendants.
The indictment, omitting formal parts reads as follows, to-wit:
Appellant herein filed a motion for a separate trial which was denied by the trial court. The cause was set for trial by jury at 10:00 a.m. on May 24, 1965.
Thereafter, on May 24, 1965, appellant filed in the trial court a notice of removal and a file marked copy of a petition for removal together with certain exhibits attached thereto. The notice of removal and petition for removal appear as follows:
The entry of remand of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, omitting caption and formal parts, reads as follows:
The State presented its evidence in chief, in part, on May 24, 1965, and concluded its evidence in chief on May 25, 1965. *411 At the conclusion of the State's evidence each of the defendants orally moved for a discharge, which was overruled by the court.
Defendant-appellant presented his evidence in chief and rested May 25, 1965. The State submitted no rebuttal evidence.
Thereupon the court instructed the jury which retired for deliberation and verdict. The jury returned its verdict on May 25, 1965. The verdict reads as follows:
The court ordered a Pre-sentence Investigation as to each defendant. The Pre-Sentence Investigation was filed and on June 18, 1965, appellant was sentenced as follows:
On June 18, 1965, appellant filed his motion for a new trial, such motion contains thirty-four (34) grounds and used twenty-three pages of record. Appellant did not waive any of the grounds in his motion for new trial, but we deem it unnecessary to give consideration to any of the grounds other than those set out at paragraphs 22 and 23 of appellant's motion, which read as follows:
Appellant's Assignment of Errors contains two specifications as follows:
The record herein clearly shows that on the morning of May 24, 1965, prior to the trial of this cause in the court below, appellant had filed with the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, his petition for removal of said cause. The record further shows that the clerk of the trial court received from appellant a file-marked copy of the removal petition, but failed or refused to file it. The record shows that appellant served a copy of the removal petition upon the State of Indiana by its Deputy Prosecuting Attorney. Finally, the special bill of exceptions shows that appellant then brought the matter to the attention of the trial judge by filing with him, in open court, and in the presence of the Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, an additional file marked copy of the removal petition.
The removal of a criminal case to a Federal Court is regulated by Federal Statute, as it appears in 28 U.S.C.A., §§ 1443, et seq.
*414 The State court loses jurisdiction at the very latest when service of the removal petition is subsequently made on the state court and the plaintiff. There is one case indicating that State court jurisdiction terminates with the filing of the removal petition in the Federal Court. Shenandoah Chamber of Progress v. Frank Associates (1950), 95 F. Supp. 719.
In any event, the state court in this case had lost jurisdiction when it commenced the trial of this cause. This is not affected by the fact that the cause was subsequently remanded. Prior to the enactment of the 1948 Judicial Code, a defendant relied upon a removal at his peril. This is no longer the situation.
*416 The record herein shows, without contradiction, that the trial of this cause was had in the court below on May 24 and 25, 1965, that before the commencement of the trial on May 24, 1965, notice of the filing of the petition to transfer was given the deputy prosecuting attorney, the court and the clerk of the trial by giving each of them a copy of such petition with the file mark of the United States District Court thereon. That even under the interpretation most favorable to the contention of the state, the earliest moment that notice of remand could come to the trial court was at approximately 5:00 p.m. on May 25, 1965, when the clerk of that court mailed to the clerk of the criminal court of Marion County a certified copy of the order of remand. There can, under the circumstances, as shown by the record, be no question but that the trial and verdict was had and reached at a time when the trial court had no jurisdiction in this cause. The trial, verdict and judgment thereon is void.
The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.
Hunter, J., concurs; Arterburn and Mote, JJ., concur in result; Lewis, C.J., not participating.
NOTE.  Reported in 236 N.E.2d 830.