Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
The Indiana Supreme Court has found an Allen County court reporter in contempt for her repeated delays in filing a requested court transcript and her failure to comply with the court’s orders.
In a published order filed Tuesday, the court ordered that Regina Gillum, court reporter for the Allen Superior Court, verify under oath any future requests for extension of time to file transcripts.
Gillum was additionally warned that further noncompliance with the Indiana Supreme Court’s orders could result in more severe sanctions.
The order involved the case of Mathew J. Cramer, II v. State of Indiana, 23S-LW-00019.
Cramer was convicted of murder, abuse of a corpse and resisting law enforcement in November 2022 and was sentenced to life in prison without parole.
According to mycase.IN.gov, Cramer filed an appeal Jan. 24.
According to the court’s order, on July 11, the court granted Cramer’s “Motion to Compel Court Reporter to Prepare Transcript” and directed Gillum to file the following no later than noon on July 14: (1) the entire transcript requested in the notice of appeal filed in the case on Jan. 24, and (2) a report to the court explaining her failure to comply with the court’s June 2 order granting her third-requested extension of time to file the transcript.
The court noted that failure to timely comply with the July 11 order may result in more stringent measures. But Gillum did not timely file either the transcript or the report.
On July 17, the court ordered Gillum to show cause within 14 days as to why she should not be held in contempt for failure to comply with the court’s July 11 order.
On July 18, Gillum filed the transcript and her notice of filing transcript in the trial court.
According to the order, also on that date, Gillum filed her “Court Reporter’s Affidavit” in response to the show cause order. The affidavit asserted she was working to complete transcripts in seven cases that were not listed in her four prior requests for extension of time.
In one of those seven cases, the transcript and notice of completion of transcript were both filed on Jan. 20 — four days before the notice of appeal in the instant case was filed.
In the remaining six cases — and despite Gillum’s assertion that she was working on the transcripts in the order of their respective due dates — the notices of appeal were filed between two to five months after the original due date for the transcripts in the instant case
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.