Douglas K. Shumate v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

<p>MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be FILED regarded as precedent or cited before any Oct 26 2020, 10:33 am court except for the purpose of establishing CLERK Indiana Supreme Court the defense of res judicata, collateral Court of Appeals and Tax Court estoppel, or the law of the case. ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Ryan M. Gardner Curtis T. Hill, Jr. Fort Wayne, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana Myriam Serrano-Colon Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA Douglas Shumate, October 26, 2020 Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No. 19A-CR-2953 v. Appeal from the Allen Superior Court State of Indiana, The Honorable John Surbeck, Appellee-Plaintiff. Judge Trial Court Cause No. 02D06-1807-F1-9 Riley, Judge. Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-2953 | [Hand-down date] Page 1 of 12 STATEMENT OF THE CASE [1] Appellant-Defendant, Douglas Shumate (Shumate), appeals his conviction for child molesting, a Level 4 felony, Ind. Code § 35-42-4-3(b). [2] We affirm. ISSUE [3] Shumate presents a single issue on appeal, which we restate as: Whether the trial court abused its discretion by admitting certain evidence. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY [4] In 2017, Shumate was in a relationship with Lisa Alpin (Alpin) for approximately eight years, and they lived together in Allen County, Indiana. Alpin had a granddaughter, S.A., born on April 6, 2011. In 2017, when S.A. was six years old, she began spending every weekend, or every other weekend, at Shumate’s and Alpin’s trailer. During the visits, Shumate began molesting S.A. Shumate would put his fingers inside S.A.’s vagina, rub her vagina, and he made S.A. touch his penis. The molestations would occur when S.A. was awake, and other times she would wake up and find Shumate molesting her. Though Alpin was in the home when Shumate was molesting S.A., she would either be in the bedroom sleeping or in the kitchen doing dishes. [5] In March 2018, approximately one week before S.A.’s seventh birthday, S.A. was playing with some friends at a friend’s house, and they were discussing marriage and other adult topics. At some point, S.A. disclosed to her friends Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-2953 | [Hand-down date] Page 2 of 12 that Shumate had been molesting her. When S.A. returned home, she was crying hysterically, and she informed her mother that Shumate had “touched her” on her “private parts and on her butt.” (Transcript Vol. II, p. 34). S.A. stated that the last time Shumate had molested her was two weeks prior. S.A.’s mother immediately called the Department of Child Services (DCS). [6] On April 4, 2018, S.A. was interviewed by forensic interviewer Lorrie Freiburger (Freiburger). The interview was recorded. While Freiburger spoke with S.A., a DCS representative, a detective, a prosecutor, and a victim’s assistant, watched the live video stream of the interview from another room. Freiburger wore a receiver in her ear so that the people remotely watching the interview could send her ...</p><br>
<a href="/opinion/4800163/douglas-k-shumate-v-state-of-indiana-mem-dec/">Original document</a>
Share Review:
Yes it is. Based on the user review published on, it is strongly advised to avoid Douglas K. Shumate v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) in any dealing and transaction.
Not really. In spite of the review published here, there has been no response from Douglas K. Shumate v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.). Lack of accountability is a major factor in determining trust.
Because unlike, other websites get paid to remove negative reviews and replace them with fake positive ones.
Douglas K. Shumate v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) is rated 1 out of 5 based on the reviews submitted by our users and is marked as POOR.
Never trust websites which offer a shady ‘advocacy package’ to businesses. Search for relevant reviews on Ripoff Report and Pissed Consumer to see more unbiased reviews.