Court Opinion

ID: 9743474
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 21:34:14.461516+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:41.516569
License: Public Domain

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING
Our decision in this matter was rendered on April 19, 1982. Moss v. State, (1982) Ind.App., 433 N.E.2d 852. (Miller, P. J., and Young, J., concurring in result). On May 6, 1982, appellant Roy Moss filed a five-page document entitled Petition for Rehearing. The document contains no separate and concise statement of the reasons why the decision is thought to be erroneous, but rather briefs once more the appellant’s argument for new trial.
By failing to set out a concise assignment of appellate error and by introducing argument into the petition, Moss has failed to comply with the requirements of Ind. Rules of Procedure, Appellate Rule 11(A), which states in part:
“Rehearings. Application for a rehearing of any cause may be made by petition, separate from the briefs, signed by counsel, and filed with the clerk within twenty (20) days from rendition of the decision, stating concisely the reasons why the decision is thought to be erroneous. Such application may, if desired, be supported by briefs, but such briefs will not be received after the time allowed for filing the petition.”
Failure to meet the requisite of this rule may result in the summary dismissal of the petition for rehearing. Mikesell v. Mikesell, (1982) Ind.App., 436 N.E.2d 95; Ross v. Schubert, (1979) Ind.App., 396 N.E.2d 147; Lamb v. Thieme, (1977) Ind.App., 369 N.E.2d 681; see also, B. Bangi, L. Giddings, K. Stroud, 4A Indiana Practice, Appellate Procedure § 152 (1979) and cases cited therein.
Because appellant has not complied with A.R. 11(A), the petition is ordered dismissed.
Miller, P. J., and Young, J., concur.