Ex-trustee Teising's appeal argues she was wrongly convicted on trial court errors

Jennifer Teising insists she resided at 132 Knox Drive in West Lafayette and Wabash Township, according to her Appellate Court brief filed about 2 a.m. Saturday — two hours after the July 8 deadline.

The brief claims that ex-Wabash Township trustee Teising's legal documents — her driver's license, voter registration, vehicle titles — all listed Knox Drive as her residence, regardless of where she might have lived while away from that address.

“Domicile means the place where a person has his true, fixed, permanent home and principal establishment, and to which place he has, whenever he is absent, the intention of returning," the brief states.

More: Wabash Township Trustee stayed at her alleged residence 27 days out of 43 weeks

Teising's attorney, Karen Celestino-Horseman, made the same argument during Teising's trial but was overruled because evidence suggested that Teising only had a bedroom at Knox Drive and mostly spent time in her travel trailer parked outside of the township and outside of the state.

The brief argues that the trial court errored by considering that Teising spent much of her time outside of the township after selling her West Lafayette house in June 2020.

She lived in Anderson or in Florida and made brief out-of-state trips but she resided at Knox Drive, according to the brief.

"(T)he trial court found that use of the address for the Knox Drive Residence for the purpose of misleading was buttressed by the fact that Ms. Teising had received deliveries from Amazon and a single delivery from Lowe’s to addresses other than the Knox Drive Residence," the brief states. "It was not disputed that Ms. Teising had packages shipped to the Jones’ home in Anderson; however, the Amazon records show that the billing address for the orders was the Knox Drive Residence.

"There were no billing addresses for Florida, Minnesota or Colorado or Anderson, Indiana — the places to which Ms. Teising had travelled and returned from during the time in question," Celestino-Horseman, argued in the appellate brief.

Celestino-Horseman unsuccessfully made the same argument during Teising's December bench trial, after which she was convicted on Jan. 5.

Tippecanoe Superior 5 Judge Kristen McVey ruled that Teising adopted a nomadic lifestyle living out of her travel trailer, which was parked at various locations. She did not reside at Knox Drive, merely lived there on rare occasions, according to the verdict.

That meant she was not a resident of the township, and as such, she should have forfeited her office and pay.

But Teising continued to be paid until her conviction, which was for theft between June 2020 and June 2021, according to the charges. She was not indict for the last six months she was in office.

Celestino-Horseman indicated that Teising, regardless of where she was staying, always returned to the Knox Drive residence.

"A second Indiana State Police detective testified that Ms. Teising’s cell phone showed that on 27 different days, the phone began the day and ended the day at a tower utilized by the Knox Drive Residence," the legal brief states.

The brief failed to note that the detective testified that Teising appeared to stay at Knox Drive 27 days out of 301 days for which they pulled Teising's phone records, which was only through March 2021.

"Further, there were instances where, during the day, the phone was in the West Lafayette area (which is in Wabash Township) but did not start or end the day there," the brief states.

Celestino-Horseman argues that making the statute that requires trustees to reside in their townships or forfeit the office is civil, not criminal.

"Bootstraping the residency law onto the law regarding theft leads to arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement," Celestino wrote in the brief. "A prosecutor can either bring a quo warranto action against the trustee or a criminal action."

The appellate brief also states that Teising's 21 convictions for theft also amount to double jeopardy because if she did forfeit her office by living outside of the township, it would amount to only one act —hence one count of theft — not 21.

The brief asks for the Appeals Court to grant Teising a new trial and require a special prosecutor, which was denied her in the bench trial.

"(T)he trial court erred in not appointing a special prosecutor. Ms. Teising and the Tippecanoe County Prosecutor are of opposing political parties," Celestino-Horseman argues in the brief.

Before the brief can be accepted by the court, it must rule on Wednesday's motion asking the Appeals Court to accept Teising's tardy brief.

If the court rejects her motion, Teising's appeal ends. If the brief is accepted, the state's attorney general's office will have 30 days to file a rebuttal brief.

Reach Ron Wilkins at rwilkins@jconline.com. Follow on Twitter: @RonWilkins2.

This article originally appeared on Lafayette Journal & Courier: West Lafayette ex-trustee's appeal argues she was wrongly convicted