About this Event
750 East US Hwy 136, Veedersburg, IN 47987
This Traveling Oral Argument will not be webcast live because it will not take place in the Court of Appeals Courtroom. Video of the event will become available within about one week after the hearing. See Oral Arguments Online for video.
Jason Dane Brown appeals his conviction of murder. He argues the trial court abused its discretion when it admitted into evidence the results of a urine sample test because the results did not indicate whether Brown was intoxicated at the time of the murder. Additionally, he argues the State did not present sufficient evidence that he possessed the requisite mens rea to commit murder. In response, the State contends the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it admitted the results of the urine sample test because (1) Brown has waived the issue; (2) there was no evidence that the State ever had access to another sample that would indicate the presence of intoxicating substances in Brown's body at the time of the murder; and (3) Brown did not argue how any other results would have been exculpatory. Regarding Brown's argument that the State did not present sufficient evidence of the requisite mens rea to commit murder, the State contends Brown had the intent to kill the victim because Brown knew discharging his gun in the victim's direction would result in bodily harm.
The panelists are Judge May, Judge Weissmann, and Judge Foley.