Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
The Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office properly applied the state’s red flag law when it seized firearms and ammunition from a man after investigating a domestic dispute at his home, the Court of Appeals of Indiana affirmed Friday.
According to court records, on April 19, 2023, James Morgan was at home with his children; his fiancée, Brooke Geller; Brooke’s daughter, Kayleigh Geller; and Elly Benjamin, who was in a relationship with Brooke’s son, Michael Geller. Morgan and Benjamin were arguing about who was responsible for a dog kept at the house.
Benjamin and Kayleigh Geller drove away from the house, but returned a short time later with Michael Geller, who went inside while Kayleigh and Benjamin stayed outside.
Next, Morgan walked outside, wielding a handgun. He had a second handgun “in his pocket,” and was carrying a shotgun on his back.
Morgan approached the car, waving the handgun “back and forth” as he cursed, yelled, and ordered Kayleigh Geller and Benjamin to leave.
Deputy Shelby Curtis was dispatched to investigate a domestic disturbance at the home. He wore a body camera.
Several other officers were present when Curtis arrived. Some of them had drawn their weapons, including rifles, because Morgan was still holding a handgun as he stood outside the house.
Morgan was arguing with Brooke Geller, who yelled at him to drop the handgun.
Morgan temporarily went out of Curtis’s sight, and he did not have the handgun when he returned.
The deputy ordered Morgan to walk backward toward him and get on his knees, and Morgan complied. Curtis handcuffed Morgan and questioned him. Curtis interviewed other residents of the home, as well.
At the end of the investigation, the officers seized two handguns, four shotguns, one muzzleloader rifle, two .22 caliber rifles and two .223 AR rifles, along with ammunition.
On April 20, 2023, Curtis filed an affidavit of probable cause listing the firearms and ammunition the officers had seized. He explained the officers seized the items “for the safety of the family and others . . . using the ‘red flag law.’”
The Montgomery Superior Court held an evidentiary hearing on the MCSO’s seizure of the firearms.
During the hearing, the state, without objection from Morgan, played a five-minute-long portion of Curtis’ body camera recording, which showed the deputy’s interaction with Morgan.
In addition, Brooke Geller testified Morgan was having “a manic episode” following a “bad night,” during which he experienced night terrors.
Next, she said she manages Morgan’s medications, including for “schizophrenic tendencies.”
Brooke further acknowledged Morgan had a prior conviction of domestic battery against her. She claimed all the firearms and ammunition belonged to her, and she said they could be released to her father-in-law.
At the end of the hearing, the trial court stated, “(T)here’s clear and convincing evidence that … Mr. Morgan is an individual who is likely to pose — who will present a risk of personal injury to himself or to another individual in the future, and that specifically on April 19 he did present a risk of harm to himself or another individual.”
The court declined to release the firearms to a third party, noting Brooke’s father-in-law had not appeared in court to confirm he would take custody of them.
It ordered that Morgan’s ability to register a firearm in the state of Indiana was suspended until further order of the court.
Morgan appealed, arguing the trial court erred in allowing Curtis to testify about statements Brooke made to him, claiming the statements were inadmissible hearsay, and claiming the court’s order directing the MCSO to retain the firearms and ammunition lacked sufficient evidentiary support.
The Court of Appeals affirmed, finding the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting Curtis’ testimony about Brooke’s statements to him and that there was a probability Morgan would present a risk of personal injury to himself or to another individual in the future.
Senior Judge Randall Shepard wrote the opinion for the appellate court.
Morgan argued the state failed to show Brooke was still under stress when she spoke with Curtis. Morgan claimed the deputy did not speak with her until he had been at the home for 15 minutes.
According to Shepard, Morgan’s claim lacks evidentiary support because he cites a portion of the deputy’s body camera recording that was not played for the trial court during the evidentiary hearing.
Shepard wrote that Curtis’ interaction with Brooke occurred shortly after she had witnessed her fiancé angrily wielding a firearm while yelling at her daughter and her son’s girlfriend, followed swiftly by her fiancé having an armed confrontation with several officers, during which Brooke told her fiancé to put down the handgun.
“Brooke appeared to be upset and cried as she spoke with the deputy. This evidence supports a conclusion Brooke was still under the stress of the event when she spoke with Deputy Curtis,” Shepard wrote, citing Holmes v. State, 480 N.E.2d 916, 918 (Ind. 1985).
The appellate court also rejected Morgan’s claims that Brooke’s statements to the deputy did not relate to Morgan’s armed confrontations with her daughter and the police.
“Brooke told the officers about Morgan’s mental health history, his refusal to take his medication, and his need for help. Brooke also said she was scared of Morgan. These statements related to Morgan’s recent frightening behavior while armed,” Shepard wrote.
Finally, the appellate court dismissed Morgan’s claim that the trial court’s order directing the MCSO to retain the firearms and ammunition lacked sufficient evidentiary support.
Brooke did not say Morgan’s night terrors and manic episodes had stopped, but merely that he was taking his medication, Shepard wrote.
“This evidence demonstrates a high probability Morgan has a propensity for violent or suicidal conduct,” Shepard concluded, also rejecting his argument that the trial court should have released his firearms to a third party.
Judges Elaine Brown and Rudolph Pyle concurred in James T. Morgan v. State of Indiana, 23A-CR-1489.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.