Brian J. Oberst v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Citation: Not availableDocket: 87A04-1704-CR-800

Court: Indiana Court of Appeals; October 10, 2017; Indiana; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

Brian J. Oberst appealed his conviction for Class A misdemeanor impersonating a public servant, arguing insufficient evidence supported the verdict. The Court of Appeals of Indiana affirmed the conviction. The case arose from a traffic stop on January 27, 2015, where Indiana State Police Trooper Ryan Wilson observed Oberst speeding and noticed him displaying a Vanderburgh County Deputy Prosecutor’s badge. Oberst falsely claimed affiliation with the Vanderburgh County Prosecutor’s Office, resulting in Wilson not issuing a citation. Subsequent investigations revealed Oberst had not been employed by the Prosecutor's Office for over six years. The State initially charged him with Level 6 felony impersonation of a law enforcement officer. After a bench trial on February 27, 2017, the court found him guilty and later, upon reconsideration, reduced the charge to Class A misdemeanor impersonation of a public servant, sentencing him to one year of non-reporting probation. Oberst had a prior similar incident on January 14, 2015, where he was also stopped for speeding and displayed a badge, leading to his eventual charge and guilty plea for the lesser offense.

Oberst challenges the sufficiency of evidence supporting his conviction for Class A misdemeanor impersonation of a public servant. The legal standard requires that only probative evidence and reasonable inferences be considered, affirming the conviction unless no reasonable fact-finder could find the elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Indiana law defines impersonation of a public servant as falsely representing oneself as such with the intent to mislead or induce reliance. Oberst argues that the evidence did not demonstrate his intent to mislead Trooper Wilson or induce detrimental reliance. 

The court references the case of Poole v. State, where the defendant impersonated an officer to obtain special treatment at a hospital. In Poole, intent was inferred from the circumstances, as the defendant sought to gain advantages through misrepresentation. The court finds Oberst's attempts to distinguish his case from Poole unconvincing. The record indicates that Oberst showed a badge to Trooper Wilson in an effort to avoid a speeding ticket, having previously done so just days earlier. He later informed a friend that he successfully evaded the ticket using the badge. Oberst's argument that he merely sought "professional courtesy" does not negate the misrepresentation intended to obtain special treatment, aligning his actions with those in the Poole case.

Poole attempted to receive preferential medical treatment by misrepresenting himself as an IPD officer. Similarly, Oberst showed Trooper Wilson his Deputy Prosecutor badge in hopes of avoiding a traffic citation. The trial court noted that Oberst strategically displayed his badge, suggesting he intended for Trooper Wilson to recognize his false authority. Oberst claimed he did not intend to induce compliance since a Deputy Prosecutor lacks authority over a State Trooper in citation matters; however, the court emphasized that the crux of the issue is Oberst's intent to have Trooper Wilson acknowledge his claimed authority. This mirrors Poole’s situation, where the intent behind the misrepresentation was crucial, rather than the actual authority held. The court found sufficient evidence to support Oberst's conviction for Class A misdemeanor impersonation of a public servant, affirming the trial court's verdict.