Court Opinion

ID: 9516884
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 23:55:03.768342+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:39:47.040244
License: Public Domain

DeBRULER, J.,
concurring in result and dissenting with opinion.
I concur in sections II, IV, and V. I cannot agree with section III, which states the court's holding that the jeopardy assessment for tax and penalty which preceded Monica Clifft's guilty plea to illegal possession of marijuana constituted a first punishment jeopardy under the Double Jeopardy Clause and that her conviction upon a plea of guilty violated the Double Jeopardy Clause. See Bryant v. State (1995), Ind., 660 N.E.2d 200 (DeBruler, J., concurring and dissenting). As I understand the record, the Cliffts have to date been subject to no collection efforts and have paid none of the tax. In light of the conclusion of this appeal, this case will now continue in the Tax Court for consideration of the other constitutional claims made by the Cliffts. I concur in that result.