Sec. 12. If a person who has no prior conviction of an
offense under this article relating to controlled substances pleads guilty
to possession of marijuana, hashish, salvia, or smokable hemp as a
misdemeanor, the court, without entering a judgment of conviction and
with the consent of the person, may defer further proceedings and place
the person in the custody of the court under conditions determined by
the court. Upon violation of a condition of the custody, the court may
enter a judgment of conviction. However, if the person fulfills the
conditions of the custody, the court shall dismiss the charges against
the person. There may be only one (1) dismissal under this section with
respect to a person.
As added by Acts 1976, P.L.148, SEC.7. Amended by Acts
1977, P.L.340, SEC.107; P.L.138-2011, SEC.18; P.L.182-2011,
SEC.18; P.L.78-2012, SEC.16; P.L.196-2013, SEC.25; P.L.158-2013,
SEC.639; P.L.168-2014, SEC.104; P.L.80-2019, SEC.31;
P.L.190-2019, SEC.32; P.L.142-2020, SEC.82; P.L.156-2020,
SEC.134.
Notes of Decisions
Miller v. State, 783 N.E.2d 772 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 5× “, Ind.Code § 35-48-4-12 (allows court to defer judgment following plea of guilty to possession of marijuana or hashish as a Class A misdemeanor and place person under court's custody subject to conditions).”
Debro v. State, 821 N.E.2d 367 (Ind. 2005).
“§ 35-48-4-12 (allowing a court to defer judgment following a plea of guilty to possession of marijuana or hashish as a Class A misdemeanor and place the person under the court's custody subject to conditions); .”
Perkins v. State, 715 N.E.2d 1016 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 10× “Ind.Code § 35-48-4-12. Thus, a defendant has no right to a conditional discharge, rather, it is a conditional liberty and an alternative to commitment to the Department of Correction that may be granted at the sole discretion of the trial court.”
Richard Dillon v. State of Indiana, 993 N.E.2d 240 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 21× “The court explained that it was obvious that the February 1, 2011, motion and order contain[ed] a scrivener’s error by improperly referencing Count 1, when Count 2 was the correct charge and the only charge to which Ind. Code § 35-48-4-12 applie[d]. . . . A scrivener’s error,…”
Carlin Graffenread v. State of Indiana, 13 N.E.3d 496 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 6× “In order for this appeal to be ripe, Graffe-mead must successfully complete the trial court’s custody conditions thereby compelling the trial court to dismiss his possession of marijuana charge in compliance with Indiana Code Section 35-48-4-12. We have held that a conditional…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.