GUILTY IN - Kimberly Dyer, 31, burned, tortured, mutilated, murdered, Elkhart, 22 Oct 2019 *Arrests*

New Posts

FrostedGlass said:
Mario is still waiting to have his appeal decided.
Owen's hearing was rescheduled:

07/08/2022
Order Scheduling Oral Argument
The oral argument currently scheduled in this matter on Thursday, October 20, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. is RESCHEDULED to Thursday, October 27, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. All other provisions in the Court's order dated June 10, 2022 remain in place.
Click to expand...

Strange - I have this in my notes for Owen:

6/10/22 Update: Order Scheduling Oral Argument. The Court has determined the case merits oral argument. The argument will be conducted in the Courtroom of the Indiana Supreme Court on Thursday, 9/15/22 at 10am.

So- no 9/15 hearing either? - I shall put him on 10/27.
 
Niner said:
Strange - I have this in my notes for Owen:

6/10/22 Update: Order Scheduling Oral Argument. The Court has determined the case merits oral argument. The argument will be conducted in the Courtroom of the Indiana Supreme Court on Thursday, 9/15/22 at 10am.

So- no 9/15 hearing either? - I shall put him on 10/27.
Click to expand...
Hmmm... I'll look again later this afternoon.
 
@Niner Sorry to mess you up; I forgot to post one. Here is the proper order:

06/29/2022
Order Issued
The oral argument currently scheduled in this matter on Thursday, September 15, 2022, at 10:00 a.m. is RESCHEDULED to Thursday, October 20, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. All other provisions in the Court's order dated June 10, 2022 remain in place.

07/08/2022
Order Scheduling Oral Argument
The oral argument currently scheduled in this matter on Thursday, October 20, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. is RESCHEDULED to Thursday, October 27, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. All other provisions in the Court's order dated June 10, 2022 remain in place.
 
FrostedGlass said:
@Niner Sorry to mess you up; I forgot to post one. Here is the proper order:

06/29/2022
Order Issued
The oral argument currently scheduled in this matter on Thursday, September 15, 2022, at 10:00 a.m. is RESCHEDULED to Thursday, October 20, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. All other provisions in the Court's order dated June 10, 2022 remain in place.

07/08/2022
Order Scheduling Oral Argument
The oral argument currently scheduled in this matter on Thursday, October 20, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. is RESCHEDULED to Thursday, October 27, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. All other provisions in the Court's order dated June 10, 2022 remain in place.
Click to expand...

Ah Ha! Okay - got it! :D
 
@Niner
The opinion on Mario's appeal has been issued; it's now in "Waiting Room" status. This probably comes as no surprise to most of us. There are some statements in the opinion that are new to me and some just add to my many questions in this case. I'll be putting a few out there as time permits. Anyone can feel free to join in.

Here is the opinion:
In conclusion, the evidence established that Angulo committed four extremely serious crimes against the victims. He tortured and killed Dyer. Angulo robbed Porter, inflicted pain on him, humiliated him, and terrorized him. Angulo has failed to establish that his sentence is inappropriate.
Judgment affirmed.
*******************
Discussion and Decision
I. Joinder Page 12
II. Denial of Right to Cross-Examine Page 14
A. Standard of Review Page 15
B. Porter Cross-Examination and the Motion In Limine
B. Commander Daggy’s testimony Page 17
III. Sufficiency of the Evidence Page 21
IV. Sentencing Page 23
 
I've always been curious what led to Porter being questioned in the Brittany Shank missing case. The opinion gave a little insight in the Porter Cross-Examination discussion:

Page 16
"Angulo only claimed that there was a case involving Shank’s disappearance, that the police had found some duct tape during a search for her, and that Porter allegedly told two individuals where the body was buried."

On Page 19, they went on to say why Williamson's testimony would not have been reliable. However, it seems to me that he did know things about Porter's involvement with Kim's murder. I'm not sure how he learned those things unless Porter told him or someone else.

Page 19
"The evidence showed that Williamson was biased against Porter and sought revenge. For instance, Williamson stated in his interview with Commander Daggy that he “really [did not] like” Porter because he was “running around with [his] . . . .” State’s Exhibit 197. Williamson also stated that Porter had assaulted him multiple times, stolen from him, “busted” his eardrum, and made his life a “living hell.” Williamson also told Commander Daggy that he would “do whatever [he] gotta do to put this guy away” because Porter had “s**t in [his] cereal one too many times.” Under these circumstances, there is no reason to find that Williamson’s assertions about Porter’s alleged confession to Dyer’s murder, were reliable."
 
Owen's oral argument has been rescheduled again:

07/27/2022 = Order Issued
The oral argument currently scheduled in this matter on Thursday, October 27, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. is RESCHEDULED to Tuesday, October 11, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. All other provisions in the Court's order dated June 10, 2022 remain in place.
Judicial Officer:Rush, Loretta H.
Serve: Duerring, Marielena
Serve: Rokita, Theodore Edward
Serve: Christofeno, Michael Angelo
Serve: Trial Clerk 20 - Elkhart
Serve: Comer, Evan Matthew
Serve: Dayton, Samuel Joseph
Serve: Becker, Vicki Elaine
File Stamp: 07/27/2022
 
FrostedGlass said:
Owen's oral argument has been rescheduled again:

07/27/2022 = Order Issued
The oral argument currently scheduled in this matter on Thursday, October 27, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. is RESCHEDULED to Tuesday, October 11, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. All other provisions in the Court's order dated June 10, 2022 remain in place.
Judicial Officer:Rush, Loretta H.
Serve: Duerring, Marielena
Serve: Rokita, Theodore Edward
Serve: Christofeno, Michael Angelo
Serve: Trial Clerk 20 - Elkhart
Serve: Comer, Evan Matthew
Serve: Dayton, Samuel Joseph
Serve: Becker, Vicki Elaine
File Stamp: 07/27/2022
Click to expand...

1658994283392.png
 
Mario's appeal has had some movement within the last few days; it came out of "Waiting Room" status and is now pending as a "Petition to Transfer". I'm not familiar with that so here is the easiest to understand explanation I could find:

"The Petition to Transfer is the key document to distill alleged mistakes made at the trial court level and on appeal by the Court of Appeals of Indiana to a very short document to catch the attention of the Justices of the Indiana Supreme Court."

In it, his attorney states why he thinks the Court of Appeals was wrong in agreeing with the judge's decisions. I'll go through and try to summarize some of the 15+ pages. Here are his arguments:

Argument
1. The Court of Appeals Erred by Significantly Departing From Law and Practice by Finding that the Trial Court’s Evidentiary Decisions Did Not Prohibit Mario From Presenting a Complete Defense in Violation of Mario’s Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment Rights.

2. The Court of Appeals Erred by Significantly Departing from Law and Practice by Finding that Mario’s Maximum Sentence Was Not Inappropriate Considering the Nature of the Offense and the Character of the Offender.
 
The State of Indiana filed their response to Mario's petition to transfer.
Here is their final answer:
"CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the State respectfully requests that this Court deny transfer."
****
There were 2 main issues that Mario's atty had. One was the length of his sentence and the other was about Robert Porter/Brittany Shank testimony. His sentence appeal was not as complicated as the Porter one was (IMO). Here's a bit about the sentence and I'll come back later with the Porter issue.

M's atty's opinion was, when the jury chose NOT to sentence Mario to LWOP, that meant that they did not want to see the other charges made into what amounted to a life sentence. IOW, if they had wanted him to spend his life in prison, they would have sentenced him to that. The way the judge sentenced him, he ended up with 127 years to serve, which is essentially life.

Here is a small part of the State's reply:
"In any event, review of a sentence under Appellate Rule 7(B) is about what an appellate court determines in its own review of the sentence. Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219, 1224 (Ind. 2008). Angulo’s insistence that a single finding on one count from the trier of fact must be extrapolated into binding the hands of an appellate court as it considers the aggregate sentence for all of his crimes is inconsistent with the standard of review under Appellate Rule 7(B). There is nothing incorrect about the Court of Appeals’ review of Angulo’s sentence, and there is certainly nothing about its reasoning that warrants further review in this Court.
...
Last,
Angulo’s sentence is not inappropriate; the jury’s conclusion that he should receive
a term-of-years sentence for murder, specifically, does not mean that a lengthy
aggregate sentence for four serious, violent felonies was inappropriate."
 
I shall shorten this up a bit...

Tuesday, October 11th:
*Oral Arguments Hearing (Appeal) (@ 9am CT) – IN – Kimberly Dyer (31) (occurred from Oct. 21 to Oct. 22, 2019, Elkhart, found stuffed in a trash bin & dumped & covered in a marshy area near Constantine, Michigan) & Robert Curtis Porter (32/now 33) serious injuries during robbery (Oct. 21-22, 2019) - for *Donald R. Owen, Jr. (20/now 23) arrested & charged (12/19/19) with murder, robbery resulting in serious bodily injury, 2 counts of criminal confinement & life without parole enhancement. Held without bond. DA will seek life without parole.
Trial began on 4/19/21 with jury selection. Trial ended on 4/29/21. Jury deliberated ~2 ½ hours reached a guilty of all counts. Phase II-LWOP began & ended on 5/17/21. 6/10/21: Sentenced to life without parole + 62 years.
Kimberly info & court info from 12/19/19 thru 5/13/21 (Trial 4/19 thru 4/29/21) & Phase II 5/17/21 (Day 1) reference post #333 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...ed-elkhart-22-oct-2019-arrests.492889/page-17
See post #345 for Phase II sentencing hearings here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...ed-elkhart-22-oct-2019-arrests.492889/page-18
Circuit Court Judge Michael Christofeno set Owen’s sentencing for June 10 & Angulo’s for June 24. 6/10/21 Update: Owen is sentenced to life without parole + 62 years.
6/10/21: State of Indiana filed resident message. Notice of exclusion of confidential info re Owen. 6/18/21: Defendant, as SRL, files correspondence to/from Court filed.
7/9/21: Owen: Administrative Event: Defendant as a self-represented litigant files letter to the clerk of the court on 6/18/21. The Court denies all relief requested for the following reasons: the defendant advised the Court that the defendant intended to appeal his sentence & conviction in this case & requested the appointment of counsel; the Court appointed counsel to represent the defendant in his appeal, but counsel has not yet filed an appearance; the Indiana Court of Appeals will order the court reporter to prepare a record which will include a trial transcript, if the defendant desires a trial transcript outside of the appeal process, the defendant will be provided with a trial transcript upon his payment to the court reporter of the cost for the same; the Court does not have discovery to provide to the defendant as requested; and finally, the defendant will be advised of the contact information for his appellate attorney upon the attorney for filing an appearance of record court. Notice of Appeal received.
11/23/21: Notice of completion of transcript. 12/16/21: Motion for extension of time to file brief filed by Marielena Duerring. 12/17/21: The grants appellant's "verified motion for extension of time to file appellant's brief. The appellant's brief shall be filed no later than 1/24/22. And Angulo's attorney was granted 1/28/22 due date.
1/20/22: Court grants the appellant's "Verified Motion for Extension of; Time to File Appellant's Brief." The appellant's brief shall be filed no later than 3/9/22.
3/8/22 Update: Owen's filed for appeal. Appeal 21S-LW-00333. For more info see post #395 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...ed-elkhart-22-oct-2019-arrests.492889/page-20
and more on appeals – see post #s 396 to 400 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...ed-elkhart-22-oct-2019-arrests.492889/page-20
6/10/22 Update: Order Scheduling Oral Argument. The Court has determined the case merits oral argument. The argument will be conducted in the Courtroom of the Indiana Supreme Court on Thursday, 9/15/22 at 10am. 6/29/22 Update: Oral argument hearing on 9/15/22 has been rescheduled to 10/20/22. 7/8/22 Update: Oral argument hearing on 10/20/22 has been rescheduled to 10/27/22.
7/27/22 Update: Order Issued: The oral argument currently scheduled in this matter on Thursday, 10/27/22 is rescheduled to Tuesday, 10/11/22 at 9:00am. All other provisions in the Court's order dated 6/10/22 remain in place.
*Matthew A.P. Murzynski (24/now 26) – Plead guilty to counts of aiding, inducing or causing a robbery that resulted in serious bodily injury; and aiding, inducing or causing criminal confinement; along with a criminal gang sentencing enhancement, in an agreement that sets a total sentence of 60 years. Murzynski was not required to testify at the trial as part of his plea bargain. 6/3/21 Update: Sentencing to 60 years in prison. Earliest release date: 1/8/2065.
*Mario M. Angulo, Jr. (19/now 21) Trial began on 4/19/21 with jury selection. Jury deliberated ~ 2 ½ hours reached a guilty of all counts for both. Phase II-LWOP began on 5/17/21. Jury recommended terms of years in prison. Angulo was sentenced to 127 years in prison. He'll have to serve 75% of the sentence before he can be considered for parole. Earliest release date: 6/12/2115.
 
@Niner His argument is going to be heard online; the video player will be available 2 minutes before it's scheduled to begin at 9 am. The couple of times I've seen his attorney, she was pretty impressive so I'm looking forward to watching this.
 
@Niner Well, that was really interesting but totally out of my realm of expertise. I'll have to listen to it again. HIs atty seemed convinced that the instruction that was left out could have made a difference to the jury. Apparently there were mistakes in both of the instructions so they couldn't have been included anyway. But his atty said that's why the attys have discussions about those kinds of mistakes and correct the errors prior to giving them to the jury.
.
The atty for the state stuck to the 'he was the leader of the gang, was called in to make a decision, he ordered Kim to be put to death' = the end.

I don't expect the outcome to change for Owen or Angulo.
 
Niner said:
@FrostedGlass - any new news on Owen's appeal? Any more court dates set up yet?

TIA! :)
Click to expand...
This is all. It will probably be some time before the SC decision. Mario is also waiting to see if his case will be transferred.

10/13/2022Documents released to Court Administration
Volumes of Exhibits 1 Other - Disk 1 Sent to S.C.
 
Nothing for Owen. Mario is still waiting for a decision to transfer to SC

08/24/2022Petition to Transfer
Certificate of Service- Electronically Served 08/24/22
Attorney:
Shuler, Donald Ray
Party:
ANGULO, MARIO M. JR
File Stamp:
08/24/2022
08/24/2022Received Document
Receive Date: 08/24/22 Order that was submitted as an attachment to the petition to transfer. Attachments to a petition to transfer are not permitted.

PostmarkDate:
08/24/2022
09/09/2022Brief - Response to Transfer
Certificate of Service- Electronically Served 09/09/22
Attorney:
Dayton, Samuel Joseph
Party:
State of Indiana
File Stamp:
09/09/2022
09/29/2022Transmitted on Transfer (Supreme Court)
 
@Niner Mario's petition to transfer was denied.

11/03/2022Order Denying Petition to Transfer
Appellant's petition to transfer denied. All Justices concur.
Judicial Officer: Rush, Loretta H.
Party: ANGULO, MARIO M. JR
Serve: Shuler, Donald Ray
Serve: Rokita, Theodore Edward
Serve: Christofeno, Michael Angelo
Serve: Trial Clerk 20 - Elkhart
Serve: Dayton, Samuel Joseph
Serve: Court of Appeals Administrator
File Stamp: 11/03/2022
11/03/2022Document Transmitted

Order
This matter has come before the Indiana Supreme Court on a petition to transfer jurisdiction, filed pursuant to Indiana Appellate Rules 56(B) and 57, following the issuance of a decision by the Court of Appeals. The Court has reviewed the decision of the Court of Appeals, and the submitted record on appeal, all briefs filed in the Court of Appeals, and all materials filed in connection with the request to transfer jurisdiction have been made available to the Court for review. Each participating member has had the opportunity to voice that Justice’s views on the case in conference with the other Justices, and each participating member of the Court has voted on the petition. Being duly advised, the Court DENIES the petition to transfer. Done at Indianapolis, Indiana, on ___________.
All Justices concur.
 
11/18/2022Opinion Certified

Serve: Shuler, Donald Ray
Serve: Rokita, Theodore Edward
Serve: Christofeno, Michael Angelo
Serve: Trial Clerk 20 - Elkhart
Serve: Dayton, Samuel Joseph
Notice Date: 11/18/2022
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 77 more.
Total: 3,518 (members: 78, guests: 3,440)

Online statistics

Members online
78
Guests online
3,440
Total visitors
3,518
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
593,416
Messages
17,986,864
Members
229,131
Latest member
Migrant
Back
Top