Indiana Court of Appeals hears case while in Martinsville High School

For a short time Thursday morning, the auditorium at Martinsville High School was turned into a courtroom.

The Indiana Court of Appeals held a hearing on a current case in front of more than 100 people including students, county officials, and the public.

It is a part of the court's Appeals on Wheels program that is intended to show the workings of the court.

The presiding judge was former Morgan County Superior Court I Judge Peter R. Foley. He was elevated to the appeals court earlier in the year. He is a graduate of Martinsville High School.

Foley was joined by fellow judges Melissa S. May and L. Mark Bailey.

The judges heard a case that had been tried in Johnson County.

More: Indiana Court of Appeals oral arguments to be at Martinsville High School

According to the case history, the victim, Sabrina Reynolds met Darius Birk. They became friends and began dating. In March of 2021, the two began arguing in Reynold's vehicle. Birk had a handgun and, during the argument, shot Reynolds in her face.

Birk was arrested and charged with attempted murder, a level 1 felony; aggravated battery causing serious permanent disfigurement, a level 3 felony; pointing a loaded firearm at another, a level 6 felony; and carrying a handgun without a license, a class A misdemeanor.

Birk was tried and found guilty of all four counts and sentenced to 35 years in prison.

After a Thursday court hearing concluded, the Indiana Court of Appeals judges took questions from the audience in the Martinsville High School auditorium. From left are Judge L. Mark Bailey, Judge Peter R. Foley and Judge Melissa S. May.
After a Thursday court hearing concluded, the Indiana Court of Appeals judges took questions from the audience in the Martinsville High School auditorium. From left are Judge L. Mark Bailey, Judge Peter R. Foley and Judge Melissa S. May.

The appeal

Birk's attorney, Michael Auger, is alleging the trial court violated his client's 6th Amendment right to confrontation and cross-examination and his right to present a defense by limiting testimony regarding certain witnesses racial attitudes. He also alleges the jury instruction on "intent" was "prejudicial and impermissibly relieved the State from its burden of proof."

In support of his case, Auger alleges within two days of the incident, the victim told investigators Birk didn't mean to shoot her. "He didn't mean to. It was an accident," she allegedly said.

Auger said the victim's father, who was allegedly paying for the apartment where the victim and her children lived, and the victim's children's father, had made repeated racial comments about Birk. Auger said they allegedly called Birk the "n" word on several occasions.

Auger alleged the situation was so bad the victim and Birk had to keep their relationship secret.

Auger said after the shooting, Birk drove the victim to the hospital.

Auger alleges the victim changed her statement at least twice. He is alleging the victim's father and children's father caused her to change her testimony and the trial court erred in not allowing the victim or the two men to be cross examined on their racial attitudes. He is alleging the victim was influenced to change her testimony by others.

Auger said the instruction on "intent" did not allow the jury to consider the incident an accident. He said the weapon had 15 additional rounds in the magazine but Birk did not use them.

State rebuttal

Attorney Steven Hosler, representing the state, said much of what Auger had brought up was considered hearsay and not admissible in court. He cited a statement that was allegedly made by Birk to the victim as showing his intent to shoot her. Hosler cited evident that showed Birk had pulled the weapon out and pointed it at the victim before shooting her.

As for the alleged racial views of the two men, they did not enter into Birk's actions, he said.

Hosler asked the judges to affirm the conviction and sentence.

In his rebuttal, Auger said "race is an issue whether we like it or not."

He alleges the state was able to give the jury a false impression of the circumstances that day. He repeated the victim's statement that the shooting was an accident and that Birk, if he had wanted to kill her had 15 additional rounds in his weapon.

The judges took the matter under advisement and may issue a decision within two months.

After the hearing ended, the judges took questions about the legal process from the audience.

This article originally appeared on The Reporter Times: Indiana Court of Appeals hears case while in Martinsville High School