Combo of Allen Docs

Filed: 4/5/2023 10:39 AM
Carroll Circuit Court

Carroll County, Indiana
EXHIBIT "B"
Filed: 4/5/2023 10:39 AM
EXHIBIT "A"
Filed: 5/19/2023 2:21 PM
STATE OF INDIANA ) IN THE CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT

)ss:
COUNTY OF CARROLL ) CAUSE NO. 08C012210-MR-000001
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
vs. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
SUBPOENA
THE STATE OF INDIANA, TO THE SHERIFF, GREETINGS:

You are hereby commanded to summon the Indiana Department of
Corrections, c/o Westville Correctional Facility, 5501 S 1100 W, Westville, IN
46391, to permit Attorney, Bradley A. Rozzi, Attorney, Andrew J. Baldwin, and their
agents to enter onto the Westville Correctional Facility for the purpose of inspecting,
measuring, surveying, and photographing the individual cell block(s), and surrounding
facility, wherein Defendant Richard Allen has been continuously incarcerated since
November of 2022. Said event shall occur within thirty (30) days of the issuance of
this Subpoena as referenced below.
WITNESS, this (affiday of May, 2023.
HILLIS, HIL ZZI
B
Bra .Rozzi, A omey f Defendant
Fourth Stree
ogansport 46947
74-7 60
HILLIs. HILLIS.
ROZZI a; DEAN, LLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST.
LOGANSPORT. IN 46947
(574.) 722-4560
FAX1574) 7222659
JOHN R. HILLIs
1.1). «7533-09
BRADLEY A. Rozz1
LD. #2336509
BRADEN J. DEAN
LD. «31941-34
STATE OF INDIANA , ) IN THE CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT
)ss:
COUNTY OF CARROLL ) CAUSE NO. 08C01-2210-MR-000001
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
vs. )
RICHARD M. ALLEN
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION TO NON-PARTY

Pursuant to Trial Rule 34 (A)(2) of the Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure,
attorney Bradley A. Rozzi requests, Indiana Department of Corrections, c/o
Westville Correctional Facility, 5501 S 1100 W, Westville, IN 46391, a Non-Party,
to produce and permit the examination of the following:
To permit entry onto designated land or other property in the possession or
control of the Indiana Department of Corrections (c/o Westville Correctional
Facility) for the purpose of inspecting, measuring, surveying, and
photographing the individual cell block(s), and surrounding facility, wherein
Defendant Allen has been continuously incarcerated since November of 2022
pursuant to the Safekeeping Order entered herein on November 3, 2022.
Attorney, Bradley A. Rozzi, Attorney, Andrew J. Baldwin, and their agent are
available to inspect the premises, upon reasonable notice, Monday through
Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. or on any other time convenient for the
Department of Corrections and Movants.
Bradley A. Rozzi requests that such production be made to Bradley A. Rozzi,

by mailing a copy of said documents to Bradley A. Rozzi, 200 Fourth Street,
Logansport, Indiana 46947.
This Request for Production is made pursuant to Trial Rule 34(C), and the
producing party is entitled to security against damages or payment of damages

resulting from this request and may respond to this request by submitting to its terms,
by proposing different terms, by objecting specifically or generally to this request by
HILLIs. HILLIs.
ROZZI & DEAN. LLc serving a written response or by moving to quash as permitted by Trial Rule 45(B).
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST.
LOGANSPOR'I'. IN 46947 Failure to respond to this Request for Production or to object to it or to move to
(574) 1224560
FAX (574) 722-2659 quash, as provided by the Indiana Rules of Civil Procedure within (30) days from its
JOHN R. HILLIS
1.1). "7533,09 receipt, may subject producing party to a Motion for Sanctions, pursuant to Trial Rule
BRADLEY A. Roux
1.1). 523365-09
37 of the Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure.
BRADEN J. DEAN
1.1). "31941-34
HILLIS, HILLIS, ROZZI
By:
ra A. Rozz' ttonéy for Defendant
00 F urth et
Logansport, IN 46947
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that I have served a copy of this document by first class US. Mail,
postage prepaid upon Indiana Department of Corrections, c/o Westville Correctional
Facility, 5501 S 1100 W, Westville, IN 46391 and the Carroll County Prosecutor's
Office, the May of May, 2023.
Bra R0221, #2 6 9
HILLI HIL OZ & DEAN
HILLIS, HILLIS.
Rozzr & DEAN, LLc
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST.
(574) 722-4560
FAX (574) 722-2659
JOHN R. HILLIS
LD. "533-09
BRADLEY A. R0221
1.1.). 323335-09
BRADEN J. DEAN
I.D. «31941-34
Filed: 6/9/2023 1:20 PM

)ss:
COUNTY OF CARROLL ) CAUSE NO. 08C012210-MR000001
STATE OF INDIANA
vs.
RICHARD M. ALLEN
TO: Robert P. Baston, #209210

c/o Westville Correctional Facility
5501 S 1100 W
Westville, IN 46391-0473
SUBPOENA
The State of Indiana, to the Sheriff of said County, Greetings:
You are hereby commanded to summon Robert P. Baston, #209210, c/o

WestVille Correctional Facility, 5501 S. 1100 W., Westville, IN 46391-0437,'to appear
for a hearing on Thursday, June 15, 2023, at 7:30 am. in the Carroll Circuit Court, 101
W. Main Street, #206, Delphi, IN 46923 to testify in the above captioned cause and
return this summons.
WITNESS, Clerk of said Court, this 9th day of June, 2023.
HILLIS, HILLIS, ROZZI & DE
By:
Bra A. Rozzi, A orne for Defendant
HILLIS, HILLIS. LL S, HILLI OZ' & DEAN
R0221 & DEAN. LLc 200 reet
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST. Logansport, IN 46947
LOGANSPORT, IN 46947
(574] 722-4560
FAX (574) 722-2659
JOHN R. HILus
1.1). #753309
BRADLEY A. RozzI
1.1). #2336509
BRADEN J. DEAN
LD. «31941-34
INDIANA STATE POLICE LABORATORY DIVISIUN Filed: 6/13/2023 11:25 AM
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS Carroll County, Indiana
Indianapolis Regional Laboratory Telephone: (317) 921-5300

550 W. 16th Street, Suite C Toll Free: (866) 855-2840
Indianapolis, IN 46202
FAX (317) 921-5626
October 19, 2022 [11 ll 1| ll 1] m] u
M. JAY HARPER
INDIANA STATE POLICE / DISTRICT 14
5921 STATE ROAD 43 NORTH
WEST LAFAYETTE, IN 47906
Laboratory Case Number: 17K-00066

0025 Request Type: Firearms
Request Number:
Agency Case Number: 17ISPC001748
Laboratory activities were performed between 10/14/2022 and 10/19/2022.
QEfiQBIPTION CE I EMS: I
a
Laboratory Item 016 Sealed paper bag containing a sealed envelope containing
Agency Item 122 40 S&W cartridge.
R LT 10 INT P A I :
314
The cartridge in item 016 was identified as having been cycled in the firearm in item
from Indiana State Police Laboratory Case Number 19K-00197 (Indiana State Police
Agency Case Number 17ISPC0017482).

gEMARKS:
Identification: An identification opinion ls reached when the evidence exhibits an
of individual marks.
agreement of class characteristics and a sufficient agreement
Sufficient agreement is related to the significant duplication of random
of a pattern or
striated/impressed marks as evidenced by the correspondence
identification is
combination of patterns of surface contours. The interpretation of
research and the reporting
subjective in nature, and based on relevant scientific
examiner's training and experience.
METHODOLOGY USED To REACH RESULTS/OPINIONS/INTERPRETATIONS:

Microscopic Comparison
Page 1 0" Reviewed by. 4875

Laboratory Case Number: 171000066
Accredited since 1991.
Aocrcdiictl by ANSl National AccrediuliOii Bond (ANAB).
Test Methods require Ihettppmva] of an analytical supervisor.
Results relate only to the items tested. Deviations from Laboratoiy
EXHIBfi' A
INDIANA STATE POLICE LABORATORY DIVISION
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS
4' EW/
Melissa Oberg
Forensic Scientist
Firearms Unit
Page 2 of 2 Reviewed by: 4875

Laboratory (:35: Number. 17g-mo§5
Accredited by ANSI Nalimwl Accreditation Board (ANAB). Accredited since 1991,
Results relate only to the items tested. Deviations iron! Labomwn'Test Methods require theappmval ofan analytical supervisor.
Filed: 6/13/2023 11:25 AM
CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS Carroll County, Indiana
Indianapolis Regionai Laboratory Telephone: (317) 921-5300

Toll Free: (866) 855-2840
,
:0! .L 550 W. 16th Street, Suite C

FAX. (317) 921-5626
October 19, 2022 II n y" m g m u u u] 1|
M. JAY HARPER
INDIANA STATE POLICE / DISTRICT 14
5921 STATE ROAD 43 NORTH
WEST LAFAYETTE, IN 47906
Laboratory Case Number: 19K-00197

0008 Request Type: Firearms
Request Number:
Agency Case Number: 17ISPC001748-2
and 10/19/2022.
Laboratory activities were performed between 10/14/2022
Q§§CRIETIQfl OF I I EMfi:
Laboratory Item 314 Sealed cardboard box containing one Sig Sauer, Model P226,
Agency Item MC8 40 S&W caliber pistol, serial number U 625 627.
Laboratory Item 314T1 Sealed manila envelope containing test fired and cycled
ammunition from the firearm in item 314.
Laboratory Item 314T2 Sealed maniia envelope containing test fired and cycled
ammunition from the firearm in item 314.
Laboratory Item 314T3 Sealed manila envelope containing test fired and cycled
ammunition from the firearm in item 314.
Laboratory Item 315 Sealed plastic bag containing one cartridge.

Agency Item MC9
Laboratory Item 316 Sealed plastic bag containing one cartridge.

Agency Item MC10
Laboratory Item 317 Sealed plastic bag containing one magazine containing eight
Agency Item MC11 cartridges and another magazine containing nine cartridges.
RE LT P! I NS TERP ETAT N :
test fired. No
The firearm in item 314 was examined for functional defects and
functional defects were found.
0f 3 Reviewed by: 4375

Page 1
Laboratory Case Number. 19K-00l97

Accredited sinoe 199 l.
Accredited 63' ANSI Notiorinl Accrediialion Board (ANAB).
Test Meliaods require lire approval ofan analyticai supervisor.
ReSulrs relate only to the items tcsred. Deviations from Laboratory'
EXHIBIT jg
Examination of the cartridge in item 315 revealed it to be a 40 S&W caliber cartridge

manufactured by or marketed as Winchester.
Examination of the cartridge in item 316 revealed it to be a 40 S&W caliber cartridge

manufactured by or marketed as Blazer.
Examination of the two magazines in item 317 revealed each to be a 4O S&W caliber
a of
staggered box magazine manufactured by or marketed as Sig Sauer having capacity
ten cartridges.
Examination of the seventeen cartridges in item 317 revealed each to be a 4O S&W

caliber cartridge manufactured by or marketed as Blazer.
The cartridge in item 016 from Indiana State Police Laboratory Case Number 17K-00066
(Indiana State Police Agency Case Number 17ISPC001748) was identified
as having
been cycled in the firearm in item 314.
A test fired cartridge case from item 314T1 was entered into the IBIS database. Images
of item 314T1 were sent to the BATF National Correlation and Training Center for review.
The test fires in item's 314T1, 314T2, and 314T3 will be returned to the contributor. It is
recommended that the test fires are retained for a period of at least five years.
REMARKS:
Identification: An identification opinion is reached when the evidence exhibits an
of individual marks.
agreement of class characteristics and a sufficient agreement
Sufficient agreement is related to the significant duplication of random
of a pattern or
striated/impressed marks as evidenced by the correspondence
combination of patterns of surface contours. The interpretation of identification is
research and the reporting
subjective in nature, and based on relevant scientific
examiner's training and experience.
METHODOLOGY USED TO REACH RESULTS/OPINIONS/INTERPRETATIONS:

Physical Examination and Classification of Firearms
Function Test
Barrel and Overall Length Measurement
Test Firing
Ammunition Component Characterization
Microscopic Comparison
NIBIN
Reviewed by: 4875

Page 2 of 3
Laboratory Case Number: 19K-0019'i
Accredited by ANSI National Accreditation Board (ANAB). Accredited since 1991.
Meilxods require of an analyiical supervisor.
Results relaie only in the items tested. Deviations from Lahoramq' Test
the approval
INDIANA STATE POLICE LABORATORY DIV 1510"
WWQ fl, 351%
Meiissa Oberg
Forensic Scientist
Firearms Unit:
Page 3 0Y3
Reviewed by 4875
Laboraiory Case Number: 19K-00197
[Ken-mailed by ANSI Natiomi Accreditaiion Emmi (ANAB). Accrediied since 199 l.
Resuiis mime only to the item tested. Dex-imions from Laboramn' Test Me1hods require Ihe appmval of an analy1ical supervisor.
Filed: 5/19/2023 2:21 PM

)ss:
STATE OF INDLANA )
)
vs. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
NOTICE OF DISCOVERY
Comes now the Defendant, Richard Allen, by Counsel, Bradley A. Rozzi, and
serves upon the Indiana Department of Corrections, c/o Westville Correctional
Facility, 5501 S 1100 W, Westville, IN 46391, a Subpoena and Request for

Production to Non-Party to be answered within thirty (30) days from the date of
service. See attached.
yAR
fey
for Defendant
I certify that I have served a copy of this document by first class U.S. Mail,
Facility, 5501 S 1100 W, Westville, IN 46391 and by the County e-filing system upon
the Carroll County Prosecutor's Office and Andrew J. Baldwin, the 19th day of May,
2023.
B Elley A 'zzi. #23365

HILLIs. HILLIs,
Rozz1 & DEAN. LLC LLIS/FIILLIS. ROZZY& DE
ATTORNEYS AT LAW O Street
FOURTH S'l'.
200
LOGANSPORT. IN 46947 Loganspo 6947
1570 722-4560
FAX (574) 7224659
JOHN R. HILLIs
1.13. "7533.09
BRADLEY A. RozzI
1.13. #2333509
BRADEN J. DEAN
1,1).«31941-34
)ss:
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
vs. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
ORDER
Comes now the Court and having communicated with the parties on Defendant
Allen’s Motion for Order on Continuing Disclosure of Defendant’s Mental Health
Records, now grants said Motion and orders the Indiana Department of Corrections
and/or any other departments, law enforcement agencies, and/or individuals assuming
jurisdiction over the care and the custody of Richard M. Allen (D/O/B: 9/9/72) to
release to Attorney Bradley A. Rozzi and/or Andrew Baldwin, upon the written request
or either, any and all mental health records associated with Richard M. Allen, without
the necessity of the execution of consents and/or waivers by Defendant Allen or his
agents.
Ordered__________________________________________.
FRANCES C. GULL, SPECIAL JUDGE

CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT
CARROLL COUNTY, INDIANA
)ss:
COUNTY OF CARROLL ) CAUSE NO. 08C01-2210-MR000001
STATE OF INDIANA
VS.
RICHARD M. ALLEN
SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER ON SAFEKEEPING
Comes now the Honorable Frances C. Gull, Special Judge in the above captioned cause,
and orders the Indiana Department of Corrections, through its Commissioner, to transport
Defendant Allen to the Cass County Jail, Cass County, Indiana, and release Defendant Allen to
the care and custody of the Cass County Sheriff, Edward Schroder. Defendant Allen shall
remain in the care and custody of the Cass County Sheriffi at the Cass County Jail, pending a
resolution of this cause. The Court further orders the
to facilitate the transfer of Defendant Allen to and from all scheduled hearings in this cause
unless otherwise ordered by this Court.
All of which is Ordered

)ss:
STATE OF INDIANA
vs.
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

Comes now the Court and having reviewed Defendant Allen's Verified Motion for
Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction, finds that immediate and irreparable
injury, loss, or damage will result in the absence of an order pending a hearing in this cause. As
such, the Court grants said Order and herein directs the Indiana Department of Corrections, by
and through its staff, from Video taping any further attorney-client conferences between
Defendant Allen and his legal team. The Court further orders that Defendant Allen's legal team
shall be afforded the opportunity to utilize their laptop computers and cellphones in the course of
conducting conferences with Defendant Allen at the Westville Correctional Facility and/or any
other Department of Correction facilities wherein Defendant Allen may be housed. Further, this
matter shall be scheduled for hearing on Defendant Allen's request for a preliminary injunction
0n
Ordered

)ss:
COUNTY OF CARROLL ) CAUSE NO. O8C01-2210-MR000001
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
vs. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
ORDER
Comes now the Court and having reviewed Defendant Allen's Motion for Order
on Continuing Disclosure of Defendant's Mental Health Records, now grants said
Motion and orders the Indiana Department of Corrections and/or any other Departments
and/or individuals assuming jurisdiction over the care and the custody of Richard M.
Allen to release to Attorneys Rozzi and Baldwin, upon their written request, any and all
mental health records associated with Richard M. Allen without the necessity of the
execution of further Contents and Waivers by Defendant Allen.
Ordered

Filed: 4/5/2023 10:39 AM

)ss:
COUNTY OF CARROLL ) CAUSE NO. 08C0122101VIR000001
STATE OF INDIANA )
vs. )
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
EMEGENCY MOTION TO MODIFY SAFEKEEPING ORDER

Comes now the Defendant, Richard M. Allen, by and through his Attorney,
Bradley A. Rozzi, and respectfully requests that this Court modify the Court Order
("Safekeeping Order") entered on November 3, 2022, in this cause. In support of said
Motion, Attorney Rozzi states as follows:
1. On or about October 28, 2022, Mr. Allen was charged with two (2)
Counts of Murder. Mr. Allen's bond was set in the amount of 20 million dollars;
2. On November 3, 2022, prior to Counsel being assigned to Mr. Allen,
the Carroll County Sheriff, via formal Motion, filed his Request by the Sherzfir of Carroll
County, Indiana, to Transfer Inmate fiom the Custom) of the Sherifi' to the Custody of
the Indiana Department of Corrections for Safekeeping;
3. 0n the same day, November 3, 2022, the Honorable Benjamin A. Diener,
Judge of the Carroll Circuit Court, executed a Court Order granting the Sheriff's request
and fiirther ordered the Carroll County Sheriff to transfer Mr. Allen to a facility, within
the Indiana Department of Corrections, as designated by the Commissioner of the

Department of Corrections, suitable for Mr. Allen's safekeeping. A11 decisions
regarding Mr. Allen's detention circumstances were made prior to Counsel being
assigned to Mr. Allen to speak on his behalf. No formal hearing regarding the Sheriff's
HILLIS. IIILLIs,
{oz21 & DEAN. LLc safekeeping request have been conducted as of the date of filing of this motion;
ATTORN'EYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST.
.OGANBPORT. IN 46947
4. Mr. Allen is currently incarcerated in the Westville Correctional Facility
I514) 7224560
FAX $74) 722-2659 where he has been detained since November, 2022;
Joan R. Hams
Ln. 117533-09
Rummy A. Rozzx
Lo. #2336509
BMDEN J. DEAN
LI). "31041-34
5. The Westville Correctional Facility is a maximum-security prison operated
by the Indiana Department of Corrections wherein thousands of individuals convicted

of the most serious crimes such as murder, rape, robbery and child molesting are
confined as a result of their convictions. To the best of Counsel's knowledge, Westville
Correctional Facility does not routinely house offender's awaiting trial, who are
presumed innocent, as the presumption should be with Mr. Allen;

6. It is further noteworthy that Mr. Allen has been continuously assigned to a
separate maximum security segregation unit within the Westville Correctional Facility
wherein the most dangerous offenders are held. Counsel has investigated and
confirmed with prison officials, that said unit routinely houses individuals serving
sentences of life without parole and others who have committed some of the most
heinous crimes known to our society or have been transferred to this unit after
committing further crimes within the Department of Corrections. Counsel was

informed by prison employees that said employees were not aware of any other
circumstance wherein a human, facing trial under circumstances such as these, has been
housed in said facility. Finally, Counsel has discovered that Westville Correctional
Facility has been the center of much attention, in the recent past, in matters involving
unequal and inhumane treatment of offenders. 1;
7. "The requirement of equal protection dictates, as appellees here agree, that
pretrial detainees may not be treated less favorably than convicted persons, unless the
difference in treatment is justified by a legitimate government interest. Brief of
appellees at 43. As the Second Circuit indicated in Rhem v. Malcolm, 507 F.2d 333 [2d
Cir. 19741, "The demands of equal protection of the laws and of due process prevent
unjustifiable confinement of detainees under worse conditions than convicted

prisoners." Id. at 336. See also, Inmates of Suffoll< Co. Jail v. Eisenstadt, 360 F.Sugg.
676. 686 IQ.Mass.l9731 affd 494 F.2d 1196 ilst Cir. i, cert. denied sub nom. Hall v
HILLIS. HILLIS,
{OZZI & DEAN. LLc Inmates of Suffolk Countv Jail. 419 U.S. 977. 95 S.Ct. 239. 42 L.Ed.2d 189
Awvrommvs AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST.
.OGANsp-on'r. 1N 4594.7 (1974); Jones v. Wittenberg, 323 F.Supfl. 93, 99-100 [fl.D.Ohio 19711, afl'd sub
I574) 782-4560
FAX 1574! 122-2669 nom. Jones v. Metzger, 456 F.2d 854 [6th Cir. 1972 l; Brenneman v. Madiggi, 343
Joan R. Hmxs
1.13. Mass-09
Bmmv A. Razz: [inmate kgpt in solitary will net $400K from stat_e_. lav. vers saw iindvstarcomr.
Ln. "sass-09
BRADEN J . DEAN
Ln. 031941-34
F.Su . 128 138 .D.Ca1.1972 ; Scale v. Manson. 326 F.Sugg. 1375
[D.Conn.197l }; Tyler v. Ciccone. 299 F.Sugp. 684 [W.D.Mo.196 9 1.";

8. Counsel recently visited the prison and was denied of his request to inspect
his client's cell block and living circumstances. Despite this, Counsel has reason to
believe that Mr. Allen has been required to endure the following conditions, over the
course of his five-plus month detainrnent at the facility:
a. Mr. Allen's has been entombed in a cell as small as a 6ft in width by 1oft in
length, a space no larger than that of a dog kennel.
b Mr. Allen is sleeping on a pad on a concrete floor.
Mr. Allen is afforded showers only one to two times per week.
Mr. Allen is required to wear the same clothes, including underwear, for
days and days on end, all of which are soiled, stained, tattered and torn.
e Mr. Allen, who is a constitutionally innocent man and maintains his factual
innocence as well, has not been afforded any opportunity to visit his Wife or
other family members during the last 5 months of incarceration during which
time he has been subjected to conditions akin to those of a prisoner of war.
Mr. Allen is allowed only an electronic tablet through which he can make
calls to family members, all of which is monitored by prison officials, with
the cost of all phone calls being home by Rick and his family.
Mr. Allen is routinely supervised by other inmates ("companions" as

referred to within the confines of the prison) who sit on watch outside of his
cell door on a daily basis.
h Mr. Allen is afforded very little, if any, recreation time outside of his cold,
concrete, and metal quarters.
Attorneys for Mr. Allen delivered nearly 1,000 pages of police reports to
Mr. Allen on Friday, March 24, 2023, with the intention of seeking their
client's cooperation in his own defense. As of Monday, April 3'", 2023, said
IIILLIS. HILLIS. information has yet to be provided to Mr. Allen;
{our & DEAN. LLc
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST. 9. The location of Mr. Allen's detention is such that he is isolated
IOGANSPORT. IN 46947
1574) 123-4560
FAX (574) 728-2859
geographically, not only from his family but also from his Attorneys, who are required
JOHN R. HILLIS
1.1).:1753309
Emmy A. Rozzx
1.1). «23365-09
BRADEN J. DEAN
Ln. «31941.34
to travel for hours to speak with him in confidence regarding his case. Said visits also
require making logistical arrangements with prison officials in advance of visits. 2;
10. It is difi'icult, if not impossible, for Mr. Allen's Attorneys to share

confidential and sensitive information with Mr. Allen due to the logistical challenges
associated with Mr. Allen's segregation and isolation to the extent that Mr. Allen is
being deprived of his constitutional right to assist in his defense. In contrast, the State
of Indiana, through it's prosecutorial and law enforcement divisions, sit in the comfort
of their own command center planning and preparing to prosecute Mr. Allen to the
fullest extent of the law;
Allen is being treated far less favorably than a convicted person,
11. In sum, Mr.
many of which are housed in less secure areas of the prison, are offered programming,
therapy, and mental health services, routine recreation, and contact visits with family
and friends;
To further complicate matters, Mr. Allen has suffered from depression

12.
dating back to his early years. Upon his incarceration, Mr. Allen was presumably
evaluated and medicated by prison medical staff. Up until a visit with Mr. Allen on
April 4, 2023, counsel for Mr. Allen found him to be polite, communicative with great
eye contact, generally responsive to our questions and exhibiting a good sense of humor
on occasion in spite of his false arrest and circumstances. However, Mr. Allen's
deteriorating physical condition has been observed by Counsel dating back to the
beginning of the new year.

As recently as Friday, April 24th, 2023, Attorney Andrew Baldwin met with Mr.
Allen with optimistic news about the direction of the case, and Mr. Allen was
inquisitive about the information, was thankful about the information and optimistic
about the information. Only ten days later (April 3, 2023), Attorneys for Mr. Allen
observed a steep decline in Mr. Allen's demeanor, ability to communicate, ability to

HILLIS, HILLIS.
iozzx & DEAN. LLC comprehend and ability to assist in his defense. Simply put, this version of Richard
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST,
.OGAN SPORT. IN 46947
I574) 7224560
FAX 574) 722-2359 2
Counsel would note that Westville prison ofiicials have been more than accommodating and courteous
Joan R. Hams to coansel during visits with Mr. Allen (other than the recent denial of our request to visit Allen's cell),
Ln. "7533-09
despite the harsh and unreasonable conditions under which Mr. Allen is currently detained.
Bmwr' A. Rozzr
1.1). #2336509
Emma J. DEAN
Ln. «31041.34
Allen was a very different version than counsel for Mr. Allen had interacted with over
the past five months. Mr. Allen appeared to be suffering from various psychotic
symptoms which counsel would describe as schizophrenic and delusional. Counsel

fiirther believes that in our April 4, 2023 interaction, Mr. Allen seems to be suffering
from memory loss and is demonstrating an overall inability to communicate rationally
with counsel and family members. Counsel experienced, these symptoms, firsthand,
upon visiting Mr. Allen on Monday, April 4th, 2023;

13. Mr. Allen's physical condition is deteriorating rapidly. Attached Exhibit
"A" is a photo of Mr. Allen, taken by Counsel at the correctional facility, on April 4th,
2023. Said photo reflects the significant toll of his current incarceration on his physical
person and by extension, his mental capacity. By contrast, see attached Exhibit "B"
which reflects his condition a year or two prior to his incarceration. The conditions
under which Mr. Allen has been forced to endure are akin to that of a prisoner of war;
14. The test for determining the constitutionality of treatment of pretrial
detainees alleged to deprive them of liberty without due process of law is "whether
those conditions amount to punishment of the detainee."§ Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S.
520. 535. 99 S.Ct. 18611 1872. 60 L.Ed.2d 447 [1979}. Here, Mr. Allen is being
punished to the fullest extent of the law. The conditions he is currently enduring have
been thrust upon him without any judicial analysis of the need for such a deprivation of
his liberty. Further, counsel is unaware of any facts, outside of those generally alleged
in the Sheriff s safekeeping petition which support the need to detain Mr. Allen on what
could casually be referred to as "death row.";
15. Approximately 2 months prior to the filing of this Petition, Attorney Rozzi
was able to secure a more traditional bed space in the Cass County Jail, a newly erected
modern jail facility with the most advanced security measures, located directly across
Rozzi's office and only approximately 20 miles from the
the street from Attorney
HILLIS. HILLIS.
Rozzl & DEAN, LLo Carroll County Courthouse. Said modification of Mr. Allen's incarceration would
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST.
LOGANSPORT. IN 46947 result in a more humane living environment in which Mr. Allen would be afforded
(514) 7224560
FAX I516 122-9669 immediate access to his attorneys and more importantly, would allow Mr. Allen to have
JOHN R. HILLIS
1.13. Mass-on regular contact visits with his family, i.e., this detention circumstance would afford Mr.
BRADLEY A. R0221
[.D. «2330509
BRADEN J. DEAN
u). "1941-34
Allen due process of law. Under these circumstances, Mr. Allen would be treated like
other inmates awaiting trial in the criminal justice system, as opposed to being punished
based only on the merits of untested charging information and probable cause affidavit;
16. In the process of facilitating Mr. Allen's removal from Westville
Correctional Facility, Attorney Rozzi communicated with Prosecutor, Nicholas
McLeland, who articulated that he had no objection to a modification of Mr. Allen's

detention circumstances to a facility closer to Carroll County;
17. Attorney Rozzi was recently informed that the Carroll County Sheriff's
Department declined Attorney Rozzi's request to have Mr. Allen removed fi'om the
harsh conditions under which he is currently detained to a more traditional County jail
near Mr. Allen's Attorneys and family. Mr. Allen asserts that said denial is a deliberate
attempt to impose conditions upon him that are intended to fi'ustrate his purpose in
defending against the charged allegations and create a hardship on him which would
drive any human to mental breakdown. Said approach to his pre-trial detention is a
direct infringement on his 6'" Amendments rights under the U.S. Constitution;
18. From a practical standpoint, it is also worth noting that the raw volume of
discovery offered up by the State of Indiana in this case, is overwhelming. For

example, there exists nearly 3,000 pages of law enforcement reports that need to be
examined in this cause. In addition, there exists thousands of hours of surveillance
video and video interviews of potential suspects, witnesses, and other interested parties.
The discovery suggests that law enforcement authorities have processed over 31,000
tips during the course of the investigation, all of which must be reviewed by the
Defense. Reasonable access to Mr. Allen, is necessary as he is needed to assist with the
process of reviewing discovery. His current detention situation does not provide this
convenience;
l9. As a further practical matter, both co-counsel for Mr. Allen are having to
HILLIS. HILLIS.
R0221 an DEAN, LLc drive hours away fiom their respective law offices in order to talk with Mr. Allen, and
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST.
Locust-om» m 43947 the time spent on the road is much more costly for Carroll County taxpayers than
1514) 722-4560
FAX (574) 725-9659
housing Mr. Allen in Cass County where everyone (except the Carroll County Sheriff)
J can R. HILLII is on board with Mr. Allen being housed during the pendency of this case; and
Ln. «7533.09
BRADLEY A. RozzI
LD. #2336509
BRADEN J. DEAN
1.1). 031941-34
20. Attorney Rozzi believes an emergency exists and time is of the essence
based upon the dramatic change in Mr. Allen's condition, including his change in
demeanor, change in appearance, and change in his overall mental health status, and
respectfully requests that this Honorable Court modify the Safekeeping Order (as
permitted by LC. 35-33-11-1) and order Richard Allen to be transported and housed at
the Cass County jail or somewhere nearer to his family and lawyers, and to do so
without a hearing, or (in the alternative) to conduct a hearing as soon as possible before
Mr. Allen is placed in further jeopardy due to his current placement, and also so that
Mr. Allen may assist his lawyers in addressing Mr. Allen's mental health concerns as
well as allowing Mr. Allen to participate in the preparation of his defense, and for all
other just and proper relief in the premises.
Respectfully mitted,
ey A. R0; #23365-09
I certify that I have served a copy of this document by the County efiling
system upon the Carroll County Prosecutor's Office and Andrew J. Baldwin the 5th
day of April, 2023.
Bradley . 221, #2 365-09

HILL ILLIS ZZI&D AN
.-
ourth et
HILLIS, HLLLIS. rt IN 46947
{0221 an DEAN. LLc
ATTORNEYS AT LAW 574-722-4560
200FOURTH ST.
'OGANSPORT. 1N 40947
I574! 1224560
FA'x' I574) 7224059
JonN R. H 11.1.15
LD. "7533-09
BRADLEY A. Razz:
Lu. «2333509
BRADEN J. DEAN
LD. #3194134
Filed: 5/17/2023 8:32 AM

)ss:
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
VS. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
VERIFIED MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Comes now Attorney, Bradley A. Rozzi, and in support of his Motion for
Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction, now swears and affmns as
follows:
1. On or about November 14, 2022, Attorney Rozzi entered his appearance on

behalf of Defendant Allen;
2. On or about November 14, 2022, Attorney Baldwin entered his appearance
on behalf of Defendant Allen;
3. Both Attorney Baldwin and Attorney Rozzi continue to represent Defendant

Allen as of the date of this Motion;
4. Defendant Allen is currently incarcerated in the Westville Correctional
Facility pursuant to the November 3, 2022, and April 14, 2023, Safekeeping Orders;
5. Defendant Allen remains incarcerated in the maximum-security unit of the
Westville Correctional Facility Where Attorneys Rozzi and Baldwin are required to
travel to engage in inperson attorney-client communications;
6. At various times between November of 2022 and April of 2023, both
HILLIS. HILLIS. Attorney Rozzi and Attorney Baldwin Visited Defendant Allen in the maximum-security
Rozzx & DEAN. LLC
ATTORNEYS A'I' LAW unit at Westville Correctional Facility. During the visits, Attorney Rozzi and Attorney
FOURTH ST.
200
(574.) 722-4560
Baldwin were allowed to possess their cellphones and computers to assist with their
FAX I574) 72$2659
attorney-client dealings. Said visits typically occurred in the office of the Captain of the
JOHN R. HILLIs
Ln. «7533-09 Westville Correctional Facility or other office spaces which appeared to be reserved for
BRADLEY A. R0221
Ln. #2336509
BRADEN J. DEAN
LD. «31941-34
administrative uses. Other than the presence of an officer placed immediately outside
the door of the various meeting spaces, until a Visit on or about Friday April 21, 2023,
some semblance of privacy was offered up to the Attorney(s) and Defendant Allen;
7. On or about April 5th, 2023, Attorneys for Richard Allen, filed an
Emergency Motion to Modify Safekeeping Order. Said Motion contained various

allegations regarding the unacceptable conditions under which Defendant Allen has and
continues to be detained. In response to this Motion, the Court essentially, re-affirmed
the original Safekeeping Order, deferring matters of Defendant Allen's incarceration to
the Indiana Department of Corrections;
8. On or about Friday, April 215', 2023, Attorney Baldwin and his staff
member, visited Defendant Allen at the Westville Correctional Facility. At all times
during the Visit, Attorney Baldwin, his staff member and Defendant Allen were under
the constant surveillance of correctional staff who also videotaped the attorney-client
conference, through a window, just outside of the meeting room under conditions
similar to that which are referenced in paragraph "9" below. Additionally, unlike the
previous Visits that occurred before filing the April 5, 2023 Motion, Attorney Baldwin
was prohibited from bringing his cellphone into the Visit;
9. On May 4, 2023, Attorney Rozzi and his staff member visited Defendant
Allen at the Westville Correctional Facility. Attorney Rozzi and his staff member were
placed inside an administrative office which was approximately 12 feet by 8 feet in size.
The room contained approximately four separate padded chairs and a desk. On one end
of the room, there were Windows facing the outside and on the other end of the room,
there was a window facing the interior hallway of the maximum-security unit. Attorney
Rozzi offered up to Defendant Allen one of the padded seats in the room. The
correctional staff required that Defendant Allen sit in a plastic chair, in the center of the
room facing the interior window. Defendant Allen was approximately 8 feet from the
HILLIS. HILLIS.
R0221 & DEAN. LLc window. The chair was situated such that Defendant Allen was facing directly at the
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
FOURTH ST.
200
LOGANSPORT. IN 46947 interior window (and directly into the Video camera). A correctional officer was then
(574] 7224560
FAX 65741 722-2659 stationed on the opposite side of the window, in the hallway, with a Video camera which
JOHN R. HIILIS
Ln. 37533-09 pointed directly at Defendant Allen and also in the direction of Attorney Rozzi and his
BRADLEY A. Rozzr
I.D.1f2336509
BRADEN J. DEAN
L1). "1941-34
staff member who were sitting right next to Defendant Allen. Attorney Rozzi is of the
belief that the entire visit, which lasted approximately one hour, was videotaped by
prison staff. Never before has Attorney Rozzi experienced such an infringement on an
accused's right to confidential communications with counsel;
10. It is also noteworthy that Attorney Rozzi was prohibited from possessing his
cellphone and laptop computer during the Visit. As a result of this, Attorney Rozzi had
no ability to discuss with Defendant Allen, any part of the voluminous discovery that
has been offered up to the defense in this case;
11. Accordingly, Attorney Rozzi respectfully requests that this Court issue a
temporary restraining order, pursuant to Rule 65(B), prohibiting the Indiana Department
of Corrections from videotaping the attorney-client visits as well as authorizing
Attorney Rozzi and Attorney Baldwin to have access to their laptop computers and
cellphones during said visits. Attorney Rozzi alleges the following in support of his
request:
a. that immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage will result to
Defendant Allen in the absence of the issuance of such an Order;
b. the moving party is reasonably likely to prevail on the merits as the
Defendant has a fundamental right to confidential attorney-client

communications at all times during the pendency of his case;
c. the threatened injury to the moving party if an injunction is denied
outweighs the threatened harm to the adverse party if the injunction is
granted; and
d. the public interest will be disserved if injunctive relief is not granted.
Attorney Rozzi further certifies that he has provided a copy of this notice to
Elise Gallagher, Attorney for the DOC, simultaneously with the filing of this
HILLIS. HILLIs. request;

Rozm & DEAN, LLc 12. Attorney Rozzi further requests that this Court issue a preliminary
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
FOURTH ST.
200
LOGANSPORT. IN 48947 injunction, affording the relief requested in paragraph "l 1" above, after notice to the
(574) 722-4560
FAXI510 722-2659 adverse party and a hearing on the merits of said request;
JOHN R. HILLls
1111153309
BRADLEY A. ROZZI
Lu. #233er
BRADEN J. DEAN
1.1).«31941-34
13. The actions of the Indiana Department of Corrections, referenced above, run
afoul of the attorney-client privilege and Defendant Allen's Sixth Amendment Right to
counsel. In addition, the prohibitions and restrictions placed upon Attorney Rozzi and
Attorney Baldwin have significantly impaired their ability to share information with
Defendant Allen regarding the charges and allegations in this case; and
14. The actions of the Indiana Department of Corrections staff are inconsistent
and far more intrusive than those privileges afforded other individuals who are awaiting
trial in the Department of Corrections and County Jails in the Sta Indiana
Bradley A/Rozzi. #23365-09'
I sweat and affinn under the pen ties/for perjury M the foregoing
representations are true.
B: A. Rdzzi, #2}'.':65-09
Jim 7. mama
Andrew J. Baldwin, #17851-41
I swear and affirm under the penalties for perjury that the foregoing
representations are true. if 7 5a! m
Andrew J. Baldwin, #17851-41
I certify that I have served a copy of this document by the County e-filing
system upon the Carroll County Prose tor's Office and Andrew J. Baldwin and by
email upon Elise Gallagher the day of y, 2023.
Hulls. Hles.
tozzr & DEAN, LLC
ATTORNEYS .Atl' LAW
200 FOURTH ST.
DGANSPORT. IN 46947
[574! 735-0660 dley RozM23363-09
FAX "570 782-2050 I
S, R
RQZZI 6/DEAN
JOHN R. Hunts ZOO/Fourth Stre
LI). «753309
BRADLEY A. Rozzx anspgnfl'N 46947
Ln, «2336509
BRADEN J. DEAN
113.381.941.64.
h_- In. Ira-1.4nn---nnnn--rnnnnnhmrcnznnnczaw0A-J

Filed: 6/7/2023 11:02 AM

)ss:
STATE OF INDIANA
VS.
RICHARD M. ALLEN
MOTION FOR ORDER ON CONTINUING DISCLOSURE OF

DEFENDANT'S MENTAL HEALTH RECORDS
Comes now, the Defendant, Richard M. Allen, by Counsel, Bradley A. Rozzi,

and respectfully requests that this Court issue an Order directing the Indiana
Department of Corrections, Carroll County Sheriff's Department, and any other

authorities detaining Defendant Allen to release to Defendant Allen's Attorneys,
Bradley A. Rozzi and Andrew J. Baldwin, copies of any and all mental health records
associated with Defendant Allen. In support of said Motion, Defendant Allen states as
follows:
1. Defendant Allen is currently housed in the Indiana Department of
Corrections pursuant to the Safekeeping Order in this cause;
2. Prior to Defendant Allen's incarceration, Defendant Allen did execute a
Power of Attorney in favor his Wife, Kathy Allen. However, no healthcare
representative directives were executed by Defendant Allen;

3. Defendant Allen's Attorneys are in need of reviewing Defendant Allen's
mental health records, most of which are in possession of the Indiana Department of
Corrections, to aid in preparation of his defense, management of his mental and
physical state, and to restore his mental and physical health so that he may assist in his
own defense;
HILLIs. HILLIs.
Rozzx & DEAN. LLc 4. AttorneyRozzi has attempted to obtain Defendant Allen's information
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST
LOGANSI'ORT. IN 46947
through the DOC but is required to execute a HIPPA Waiver. Said Waiver will require
(574) 722-4560
FAX (574! 722-2659 Defendant Allen's signature;
JOHN R. HILLIS
r. n. «753309
BRADLEY A. Razz!
Lu. «2336509
BRADEN J. DEAN
1.0.331941-94
5. Defendant Allen is currently in a deteriorating state, both mentally and
physically, and therefore Attorney Rozzi has concerns regarding Defendant Allen's
ability to execute a knowing and voluntary waiver;
6. Defendant Allen is also incarcerated approximately 1 1/2 hours away from
Attorney Rozzi and therefore, obtaining signatures on a routine basis is burdensome;

7. There is no legal and/or practical reason why Attorneys for Defendant Allen
should not be entitled to his mental health records; and
8. Defendant Allen respectfully requests that this Court issue an Order
directing the Indiana Department of Corrections and/or any other agencies in charge of
defendant Allen's care and custody to release to Attorney Rozzi and Attorney Baldwin,
Defendant Allen's mental health records, upon their written request.
Respectfully submitted,
ra ey A. zzi,@23365-09
o or Defendant
of this document by the County e-filing
I certify that I have served a copy
system upon the Carroll County Prosecutor's Office and Andrew J. Baldwin the
[m day of June, 2023.
Br eyA 3365 -9
LLIS OZZ & DEAN
200 Fou treet
HILLIS. HILLIS.
Rozzx & DEAN, LLc sport, IN 46947
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST
LOfiANSPORT. IN 46947
(574.1 722-4580
FAX1574) 7222659
JOHN R. HILLIS
Ln. «753309
BRADIEY A. Rozzx
Ln. 92336509
BRADEN J. DEAN
I.n.1r31941-34
Filed: 6/13/2023 11:25 AM
STATE OF INDIANA ). IN THE CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT

)ss:
STATE OF INDIANA
VS.
RICHARD M. ALLEN
MOTION 1N LIMINE REGARDING BALLISTICS
The Defendant, Richard M. Allen, by Counsel, Bradley A. Rozzi, respectfully

moves this Court as follows:
l. Defendant Allen is charged with two separate Counts of Felony Murder
pursuant to I.C. 3542-1-1(2).
2. There is no trial date set as of the date of the filing of this Motion.
3. Counsel for Defendant Allen, upon information and belief, has reasonable
cause to believe that the prosecution intends to introduce as evidence the following:
a. Testimony from Laboratory Analyst, Melissa Oberg and/or her agent,

supporting the findings referenced in Indiana State Police Laboratory
Division Certificate of Analysis attached hereto as Exhibit "A".
b. Testimony from Laboratory Analyst, Melissa Oberg and/ or her agent,

supporting the findings referenced in Indiana State Police Laboratory
Division Certificate of Analysis attached hereto as Exhibit "B".
c. Bench notes and other literature and information in support of

conclusions generated in the attached Exhibits "A" and "B".
4. This evidence is inadmissible for the following reasons:
a. The items analyzed and the conclusions drawn by the Indiana State
Police Laboratory Division are irrelevant and therefore inadmissible
under Rule 401 and Rule 402 of the Indiana Rules of Evidence.
HILLIS, HILLIS.
Rozz1 & DEAN. LLc b. The probative value of said evidence is substantially outweighed by
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST. the danger of unfair prejudice. Furthermore, admission of such
LOGANSPORT. IN 46947 information will confuse and mislead the jury all of which is in
(5741 722-4560
FAX (574.! 722-2659 violation of Rule 403 of the Indiana Rules of Evidence.
J ouN R. HILLIS
LDJflasaOB c. Testimony regarding the analysis and conclusions referenced in
BRADLEY A. R0zz1
Ln. «23365.09 Exhibits "A" and "B" runs afoul of Rule 702 of the Indiana Rules of
BRADEN J. DEAN Evidence in that the examiner is not qualified to draw the referenced
1.1). 331941-34
conclusions and in addition, the examiner's testiinony does not rest
upon reliable scientific principles.
5. Such evidence is not necessary for a full and fair determination of the facts
of the instant case.
WHEREFORE, the Defendant, by Counsel, respectfully requests that this

Motion in Limine be granted; and request the Court to order the State of Indiana,
through its prosecutors, and its Witnesses not to mention, refer to, interrogate
concerning, or attempt to convey to the jury in any manner, either directly or indirectly
the existence of any analysis conducted with regard to the items referenced in Exhibits
"A" and "B" as well as any conclusions drawn therefiom Without first obtaining
permission of the Court outside the presence of the jury; flirther instruct the State of
Indiana and its witnesses not to make any reference to the fact that this Motion has been
filed and granted and to warn and caution each and every one of their witnesses to
strictly follow these same instructions; and order all relief just and proper in the
premises.
Bra 0221 3366-09

orne f0 fenda
acopy of this. document by the County efiling

I certify that I have served
HmLIs. HILLIS. system upon the Carroll County Prosecutor's Office d Andrew J. Baldwin the
Rozzx dz DEAN, LLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW day of June, 2023.
FOURTH ST.
200
(574,0 722-4560
FAX (5'74) 7222859
JOHN R. HILLIS radle ozz #23366-09

1.1). 97533-09
ISl HILLIS. ROZZI & DEAN
BRADLEY A. Rozzx
LD. #2336509 200 Fouhh St
BRADEN J. DEAN
1.1). #31941-34
Filed: 5/3/2023 2:59 PM
)ss:
COUNTY OF CARROLL ) CAUSE NO. 08C01-2210MR-000001
STATE OF INDIANA )
VS. )
RICHARD M. ALLEN
MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA
pursuant to Rule 45(B) of the Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure, requests that this
Honorable Court quash the Subpoena issued by Carroll County Prosecutor, Nicholas
McLeland, on or about the 20th day of April, 2023, in the above captioned matter. In
support of said Motion, Defendant Allen states as follows:
1. On or about April 20, 2023, Defendant Allen was served with a Motion for
Leave of Court to Subpoena Third-Party Records;
2. Attached to said Motion was a Subpoena Duces Tecum directed to
Westville Correctional Facility, a division of the Indiana Department of Corrections;

3. More specifically, said Subpoena referenced the following documents and
records to be produced:
(a) Any mental health records that you may have concerning Richard
M. Allen, including all records from any physician that has
evaluated or examined Richard M. Allen from the beginning of his
stay at Westville Correctional Facility, on or about November 3rd ,
2022 until present.
(b) The results of any mental health evaluation and/or exams performed
on Richard M. Allen while he has been incarcerated at Westville
Correctional Facility, on or about November 3rd, 2022 until present.
(c) Any other documents, records, notes, videos and/or writings that
HILLIS. HILLIS. the facility may have pertaining to Richard M. Allen mental health
Rozzx & DEAN. LLC during his time of incarceration at Westville Correctional Facility,
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST. on or about November 3m, 2022 until present.
(574) 722-4560
FAX (574D 722-2659
JOHN R. HULIS
LD. «753309
4. The Subpoena is unreasonable and oppressive for the following reasons:
BRADLEY A. Rozzt
u). #2336509 a. Disclosure of the documents violates Defendant Allen's privacy
BRADEN J. DEAN rights under 45 C.F.R. 164, ct a1.; and
1.1). "1941-34
b. Prosecutor McLeland is requesting records which are irrelevant as
there are no pending matters pertaining to Defendant Allen's
competency to stand trial, nor has Defendant Allen raised the
defense of insanity.
quashing the Subpoena and for all other just and proper relief in the premises.
Respectfully Submitted,
Bram. zzi, #" 65-09]

HILLIS, LI OZZI & DEAN
system upon the Carroll County Prosecutor's Office and Andrew J. Baldwin the 9
day of May, 2023.
Bradle A. R0 ,#§336 9
HIL S, H S, I & DEAN
20F Stre'et
574-722-4560
HILLIS. HILLIS,
Rozzr & DEAN. LLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST.
[574) 7294560
FAX (574) 733-2659
JOHN R. HILLIS
LD. «753309
BRADLEY A. R0221
LD. #2338509
BRADEN J. DEAN
LD. #319 41-34
Filed: 5/3/2023 2:59 PM
STATE OF INDIANA ) TN THE CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT

)ss:
STATE OF INDIANA
vs. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN
MOTION TO OUASH SUBPOENA

(a) Any medical documents that you may have concerning Richard M.
Allen, including all records from any physician that has evaluated
or examined Richard M. Allen from the beginning of his stay at
Westville Correctional Facility, on or about November 3rd , 2022
until present.
(b) The results of any medical evaluation performed on Richard M.

Allen while he has been incarcerated at Westville Correctional
Facility, on or about November 3rd, 2022 until present.
(c) Any other documents, records, notes, Videos and/or writings that
the facility may have pertaining to Richard M. Allen medical health
HILLIS, HILLIS, during his time of incarceration at Westville Correctional Facility,
Rozm & DEAN. LLc on or about November 3rd, 2022 until present.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST.
(574.) 722-4580
FAX (574) 722'2659
JOHN R. HILLIS a. Disclosure of the documents violates Defendant Allen's privacy

rights under 45 C.F.R. 164, et al.;; and
LD. «753309
BRADIEY A. Rozzx
Lu «23365.09
BRADEN J. DEAN
LD. "1941-34
b. Prosecutor McLeland is requesting records which are irrelevant as
there are no pending matters pertaining to Defendant Allen's
competency to stand trial, nor has Defendant Allen raised the
defense of insanity.
'
rad .Ro 23365-04)
Lls, 1 s,ROZZI&DEAN
system upon the Carroll County Prosecutor's Office and Andrew J. Baldwin the 3 l'
day of May, 2023.
Brad A R 1 #23365 9
HI IS. HI OZ & DEAN
2 F treet
Logansport, 947
574-722-4560
HILLIs, HILLls.
R0zz1 & DEAN. LLc
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST.
1514) 722-4560
FAX (574D 722-2859
JOHN R. HILLIs
I.D. 3763309
BRADIEY A. Rozzx
Ln. #2338509
BRADEN J. DEAN
1.1). "31941-34
Filed: 5/3/2023 2:59 PM
)ss:
STATE OF INDIANA )
VS. )
RICHARD M. ALLEN
l. On or about April 20, 2023, Defendant Allen was served with a Motion for
Leave of Court to Subpoena ThirdParty Records;

(a) Any and all audio/Video recordings of Richard M. Allen while he is

in his cell or being moved from his cell to recreational area for the
time period of his incarceration at Westville Correctional Facility.
(b) Any notes from any guards, inmates or other Westville personnel
that have made written observations of Richard M. Allen, either
while he is in his cell or when he is being moved from one place to
another for the time period of his incarceration at Westville
Correctional Facility.
(c) Recordings of any interviews done with Richard M. Allen by

anyone at the facility while he has been incarcerated at Westville
I-IILLIS. HILLls. Correctional Facility.
Rozzx & DEAN, LLc
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH S'l'. (d) Copies of any recorded phone calls, outside of phone calls made to
LOGANSPORT. IN 46947 his attorneys, while he was incarcerated in the facility.
(570 722-4560
FAX (574) 722-2659
JOHN R. HILLIS (e) Any written requests made by Richard M. Allen while he was at
1D. "7533-09 Westville Correctional Facility.
BRADLEY A. Rozzx
1.n.#23305-oo
BRADEN J. DEAN
LD. mu 941-34
(f) Any other documents, records, notes, videos and/or wn'tings that
the facility may have pertaining to Richard M. Allen for his
incarceration at that facility.
a. The requested documents may contain medical and/or psychiatric

information associated with Defendant Allen and therefore, are
protected under 45 C.F.R. 164, et al.; and
b. Any information derived from interviews done with Defendant

Allen by members of the Westville Correctional Facility amount to
a violation of Defendant Allen's Fifth and Sixth Amendment Rights
under the United States Constitution and Article I § 13 and Article I
§ l4 of the Indiana Constitution.
dley Mozzi, #2 65 0
ILLIST HILLISXOZZI DEAN
CERTIFICATE 0F SERVICE
of this document by the County efiling

system upon the Carroll County Prosecutor's Office and Andrew J. Baldwin the 6
day of May, 2023.
HILLIS. HILLIS.
Rozzx & DEAN. LLc
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST.
1570 722-4580
FAX 674) 722-2659
Bradle A , # 3365-09
HIL S, LIS, OZZI EAN
JOHN R. HILLIS 20 rth Street
Ln. "533-09
BRADLEY A. Rozzx Logansport, IN 4 9
Ln. #2335509 574-722-45 60
BRADEN J. DEAN
Ln. "31941-34
Filed: 5/3/2023 2:59 PM

)ss:
STATE OF INDIANA )
VS.
RICHARD M. ALLEN
CVS Headquarters;
(a) The work records for Richard Allen.
(b) Copies of all work records for Richard Allen, including attendance
records for those days.
(c) Personal files for Richard Allen
a. The records are irrelevant and not likely to lead to the discovery of
HILLIS. HILLIs.
Rozzr & DEAN. LLc admissible evidence; and
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST.
LOGANSPORT. IN 46947 b. The files may contain information protected under 45 C.F.R. 164, et
(574) 722-4560
al.
$581574) 722-2859
JOHN R. HILLIS
1.1). #75:!"9
BRADLEY A. Rozzr
1.1). «23305.09 5. Defendant Allen respectfully requests that this Court issue an Order
BRADEN J. DEAN
Ln. 331941-34 quashing the Subpoena and for all other just and proper relief in the premises.
Br 6y 0221, #23 65-09

LLIS R ZI& AN
system upon the Carroll County Prosecutor's Office and Andrew J. Baldwin the $1"; /
day of May, 2023.
Bradley R0 233 -09

HILL , H I,RO 1&DE
200 0 Str et
Lo port, 947
574-722-45 60
HILLIS. HILLIs.
Rozzr 8y DEAN. LLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST.
(574) 722-4580
FAX (5'74) 722-2659
JOHN R. IIILLIS
LD. «7533.09
BRADLEY A. Rozzx
1.1). #9333509
BRADEN J. DEAN
LD. #31941-34
Filed: 2/13/2023 11:08 AM

) ss:
COUNTY 0F CARROLL )
STATE 0F INDIANA ) CAUSE NUMBER: 080012210MR00001

)
vs. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN
_
STATE'S MOTION REQUESTING PROTECTIVE ORDER GOVERNING

DISCOVERY _
Now comes the State of Indiana, by Prosecuting Attorney Nicholas C. McLeland, and
advises that the State has filed charges against the Defendant, under the above referenced cause
number. That pursuant to Rule 26 of the Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure, the Defendant is
entitled to discovery which includes materials of a sensitive nature. Therefore, pursuant to the
provision of Rule 26(C), the State requests that the Court issue a protective Order governing
these materials as follows:
1. That one copy of the discovery material shall be provided to Counsel for the
Defendant.
2. That the discovery material shall not be used for any purpose other than to prepare
for the defense in the above referenced cause number.
3. That the discovery material shall not be publicly exhibited, displayed, shown,
used for educational, research or demonstrative purposes or used in any other
manner, except in judicial proceedings in the above referenced action.

4. That the discovery material may be viewed only by parties, counsel and counsel's
investigators and experts.

5. That if copies of the discovery material are made and provided to the Defendant,
investigators or experts for the Defense, that sensitive and private information
contained in the discovery shall be redacted, including any social security
numbers, IDAC information or NCIC information, any information related to the

personal information of juveniles, including social security numbers, names and
date of birth and any FBI sentinel information.
6. That discovery material shall not be distributed to any person not authorized to
View it, including Witnesses, family members, relatives and friends of the
Defendant.
7. That no person other than the Defendant, Counsel for the Defendant and those
persons listed in paragraph 5 shall be granted access to said discovery material, or

the substance of any portion thereof unless that person has signed an agreement in
writing that he or she has received a copy of this Order and that he or she submits
to the Court's jurisdiction and authority with respect to the material; agrees to be
subject to the Court's contempt powers for any violation of this Order; and is
granted prior permission by this Court to access said discovery material.

8. That upon final disposition of the case, the discovery material referred to in
paragraph 1 and any and all transcripts shall be returned to the Carroll County
Prosecutor's Office or maintained by Defense Counsel pursuant to the terms

herein.
9. That Counsel for the Defendant shall be responsible to ensure that all persons
involved in the defense of this case comply with this Order.
10. That the written documents/records provided by the State with the discovery
material fall under the same rules as described above.
Wherefore the State respectfully asks that the Court to issue an Order protecting the
sensitive material distributed to the Defense and for all other just and proper relief in the
premises.
fl/nrc mm
Nicholas C. McLeland
v
Attorney #28300-08
Prosecuting Attorney
The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing instrument was served upon the Defendant's attorney of
record, through personally delivery, ordinary mail with proper postage affixed or by service through the efiling system
and filed with Carroll Circuit Court, this _l3fl' day of February, 20
_
nrc MM
Attorney #28300-08
Filed: 5/3/2023 2:59 PM

)ss:
COUNTY OF CARROLL ) CAUSE NO. 08C012210-MR000001
STATE OF INDIANA
)\.l)))
VS.
RICHARD M. ALLEN
MOTION TO RECONSIDER AND REQUEST FOR

DUE PROCESS HEARING
respectfully requests that this Court reconsider the Order on Judgment of the Court
entered on April 14, 2023 and further, schedule a due process hearing in this cause. In
l. Defendant Allen is currently incarcerated in the Indiana Department of

Corrections pursuant to the Court Order of November 3, 2022, wherein the Honorable
Benjanrin A. Diener ordered the transfer of Defendant Allen pursuant to I.C. 3533-11-1
(Safekeeping Statute);
2. At no time prior to the issuance of the November 3, 2022, Safekeeping
Order was there any evidentiary hearing to support the issuance of said Order;
3. Defendant Allen has been continuously incarcerated in the maximum
security unit of the Westville Correctional Facility since November of 2022;

4. During the course of his incarceration, Defendant Allen has been subjected
to oppressive conditions to the extent he has been treated less favorably than other
inmates in similar circumstances. Defendant Allen incorporates herein, the allegations
contained in Defendant's April 5, 2023, Emergency Motion to Modify Safekeeping

HILLIS. HILLIS.
ROZZI & DEAN, LLC Order;
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 [FOURTH ST. 5. The Emergency Motion filed on April 5, 2023, requested that this Honorable
(574) 72M560
FAX (574) 7292859
Court schedule a hearing so as to allow Defendant Allen to offer up evidence in support
JOHN R. HILIJS of his request. No hearing was afforded to Defendant Allen;

1.1).u7533ou
BRADLEY A. Rozzx
Ln. #2336509
BRADEN J. DEAN
Ln #3194144
6. On April 14, 2023, the Court, sua sponte, issued an Order for Judgment of
the Court essentially, reinforcing the safekeeping Order that was previously issued by
the Honorable Judge Benjamin A. Diener;
7. I.C. 35-33111 holds that the "Court shall determine whether the inmate is
in imminent danger of serious bodily injury 0r death, or represents a substantial threat
"
t0 the safety of others. Article I, Section 12 of the Indiana Constitution provides that
"all Courts shall be open,' and everjz person, for injury done to him in his person,
propert12, or reputation, shall have remedy by due course 0f law justice shall be
administered freely and without purchase,' completely, and without denial; speedily,
"
and without delay. Ledbetter v. Hunter, 652 N.E.2d 543 (June 1995). There has been
no showing, either prior to the November 2022 Safekeeping Order and/or prior to the
issuance of the Order for Judgment of the Court of April 14, 2023, which supports the
need to confine Defendant Allen in the Indiana Department of Corrections, under his
current conditions;
8. Defendant Allen fisrther believes that his Sixth Amendment right to counsel
and corresponding rights under Article I, Section 12 of the Indiana Constitution have
been violated for reasons including, but not limited to, the following:
a. Defendant incorporates the allegations contained in the Emergency

Motion to Modify Safekeeping Order file-marked April 5, 2023;
b. All of Defendant Allen's movements, including his meetings with his

attorneys are videotaped by Department of Correction officials;
c. Information regarding Defendant Allen's medical and psychiatric

condition may have been disclosed without his consent; and
d. Defendant Allen is unable to discuss the merits of his case, or

anything associated therewith, other than through his lawyers on a
limited and restricted basis due to logistical challenges with his
current detention and due to the distance between he and his lawyers.
HILLIs. HILLIS.
Rozz1 & DEAN. LLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW 9. Defendant Allen respectfully requests that this Court set an evidentiary
FOURTH ST.
200
(574! 722-4560 hearing in this matter and after hearing evidence, modify and/or rescind the Safekeeping
FAX (574) 7222659
Order previously issued in this cause, and for all other just and proper relief in the
JOHN R. 11111.13
1.13. "533-09
BRADIEY A. Rozzx premises.

1.1). #2336509
BRADEN J. DEAN
Lo. #3194144
A.
W365639
system upon the Carroll County Prosecutor's Office and Andrew J. Baldwin the 3rd
day of May, 2023.
Bradl {A110 ', 2336 -09

HI IS, HI S,ROZZ & BAN
20 Street
Logansport, 47
574-722-4560
H.1LLIS. HILLIS.
Rozz1 & DEAN, LLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST.
1514) 722-4560
FAX (574! 122-2659
JOHN R. films
:1). #753309
BRADLEY A. Rozzr
ID. #2336509
BRADEN J. DE AN
1.0.331941-34
)ss:
STATE OF INDIANA
)
VS.
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
ORDER
The Court having reviewed Defendant's Motion to Continue Bail Hearing and
Jury Trial Setting, now grants said Motion and resets this matter for a bail hearing on
, at .m.
and Jury Trial on , at
Ordered

)ss:
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
vs. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
ORDER
The Court having reviewed Defendant’s Motion to Reconsider and Request for
Due Process Hearing, now sets said matter for hearing on
___________________________________________________________________.
Ordered__________________________________________.

Filed: 5/3/2023 2:59 PM

)ss:
STATE OF INDIANA )
VS. )
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
VERIFIED REQUEST TO PROHIBIT PUBLIC ACCESS

TO A COURT RECORD
Bradley A. Rozzi, Counsel for Defendant Allen, being first duly sworn upon his
oath, requests the Court to prohibit public access to four separate Motions to Quash
Subpoena, filed simultaneously herewith, and in support of said request states as

follows:
l. Access or dissemination of the Court Record will create significant risk of
substantial harm to the requestor, other persons, or the general public; and
2. Attorney Rozzi makes said request in an effort to remain in compliance with
the Order or Judgment of the Court (Gag Order) entered in this cause on December 2,
2022.
I affirm under penalty of perjury as specified by LC. 35-44.1-2-1, that the

foregoing representations are true.
Dated this 3rd day of May, 2023.
Br
/ ey
tto myfo
.Ro 1,#23365
efendant
9
HILLIs. HILLIS. HILL ILLIS, ROZZI & DEAN

Rozz1 & DEAN. LLC 200 Fourth Street
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
FOURTH ST.
200 Logansport, TN 46947
LOGANSPORT. 1N 46947
(574) 722-4560
FAX1574! 7222659
J onN R. HILLxs
1.1). $7533.09
BRADLEY A. Rozzx
1.1). «2336509
BRADEN J. DEAN
1.1). "31941-34
Filed: 5/3/2023 2:59 PM

)ss:
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
VS. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
VERIFIED REQUEST TO PROHIBIT PUBLIC ACCESS

TO A COURT RECORD
Bradley A. Rozzi, Counsel for Defendant Allen, being first duly sworn upon his
oath, requests the Court to prohibit public access to the Motion to Reconsider and
Request for Due Process Hearing, filed simultaneously herewith, and in support of said
request states as follows:
1. Access or dissemination of the Court Record will create significant risk of
substantial harm to the requestor, other persons, or the general public; and
2. Attorney Rozzi makes said request in an effort to remain in compliance with
the Order or Judgment of the Court (Gag Order) entered in this cause on December 2,
2022.
I affirm under penalty of perjury as specified by LC. 35-44.l-2-1, that the

foregoing representations are true.
Dated this 3rd day of May, 2023.
radley Rozzi. #2336709

Attornei/ for Defen
HILLIS. HILLIS. LIS. HILLMOZZI & DEAN
Rozzl & DEAN. LLC 200 Fdunth'Street
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
FOURTH ET.
200 Logansport, IN 46947
(5741 7224560
FAX (5741 722-2659
JOHN R. Hams
1.1). #7533439
BRADIEY A. Rozzl
Ln. menses-09
BRADEN J. DEAN
Ln. "1941-34
) SS:
COUNTY 0F CARROLL )
STATE 0F INDIANA ) CAUSE NUMBER: 08C01221oMR-00001

)
VS. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
ORDER
Comes now the Court, the State of Indiana, by Nicholas C. McLeland, Prosecuting
Attorney, having filed its' Motion Requesting Protective Order Governing Discovery, and the
Court being duly advised in the premises, now grants said Motion and the State, the Defendant
and Counsel for the Defendant, are now instructed and ORDERED as follows:
Defendant.
2. That no additional copies of the discovery material shall be made by the
Defendant, Defendant's Counsel, investigator, expert or any other representative

or agent of the Defendant for any reason.
3. That the discovery material shall not be used for any purpose other than to prepare
for the defense in the above referenced cause number.
4. That the discovery material shall not be publicly exhibited, displayed, shown,
used for educational, research or demonstrative purposes or used in any other
manner, except in judicial proceedings in the above referenced action.

5. That the discovery material may be viewed only by parties, counsel and counsel's
investigators and experts.

6. That if copies of the discovery material are made and provided to the Defendant,
investigators or experts for the Defense, that sensitive and private information
contained in the discovery Shall be redacted, including any social security
numbers, IDAC information or NCIC information, any information related to the

personal information of juveniles, including social security numbers, names and
date of birth and any FBI sentinel information.
7. That none of the discovery material shall be divulged to any person not authorized
to View the discovery material; this includes other witnesses, family members,
relatives and friends of the Defendant.

8. That no person other than the Defendant, Counsel for the Defendant and those
persons listed in paragraph 5 shall be granted access to said discovery material, or

the substance of any portion thereof unless that person has signed an agreement in
writing that he or she has received a copy of this Order and that he or she submits
to the Court's jurisdiction and authority With respect to the discovery; agrees to be
subject to the Court's contempt powers for any violation of this Order; and is
granted prior permission by this Court to access said discovery.
9. That upon final disposition of the case, the discovery material referred to in
paragraph l and any and all transcripts shall be returned to the Carroll County
Prosecutor's Office or maintained by Defense Counsel pursuant to the terms
herein.
10. That Counsel for the Defendant shall be responsible to ensure that all persons
11. That the written documents/records provided by the State with the discovery
IT IS SO ORDERED this day of February, 2023.
Frances Gull, Special Judge

Copy: State
Rozzi
Baldwin
Filed: 1/31/2023 1:25 PM

) ss:
COUNTY 0F CARROLL )
STATE 0F INDIANA ) CAUSE NUMBER: 08C012210MR00001

)
VS. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
STATE'S RESPONSE TO DEFENSE'S PETITION TO LET TO BAIL
Now comes the State of Indiana, by Prosecuting Attorney, Nicholas C. McLeland, and
respectfully files it's response to the Defendant's Petition to Let to Bail and would ask the Court
to deny the same. The State of Indiana would ask the CouIt to not set bail or to release the
Defendant on his own recognizance and would ask the Court to continue to hold the Defendant
without bond. In support the following request, the State shows the following:
l. That charges were filed against the Defendant, Richard Allen, on October 28th, 7
2022, for 2 counts of Murder, in Violation of I.C. 35-42-1-1 (2).

2 That at the initial hearing, held on October 28th, 2022, the State of Indiana asked
that the Defendant be held without bail and the Court ordered that the Defendant
is to be held without bond.
3 That the Defendant filed a Petition to Let Bail on November 21". 2022, stating
that the proof of guilt is not evident, nor is the presumption of guilt strong that the
Defendant is guilty of Murder.

4 That the Defense is asking that the Defendant be released on his own
recognizance or that a reasonable bail be set.

5 That per the Carroll County Local Rules, the Defendant is presumed to be held
without bond on the offense of Murder.
6 That the State believes there is competent evidence that the Court can rely on and
from which the Court can make it's own independent determination that the
admissible evidence against the accused adds up to strong and evident proof of
guilt.
7 That the State believes the evidence shows culpability of the actual crime of
Murder, for which bail may be wholly denied.
8. That the State believes this evidence shows by a preponderance of the evidence
that the Defendant committed the crime of Murder.
9. Under I.C. 3533-8~2, the crime of Murder is not bailable if the State proves by a
preponderance of the evidence that the proof is evident or the presumption strong
that the Defendant committed the offense.
Wherefore, now comes the State of Indiana, by Prosecuting Attorney, Nicholas C

McLeland, and files their response to the Defendant's Petition and asks the Court to deny the
request, find that the State has met it's burden, and to hold the Defendant without bail until a trial
can be held on this matter and for all other just and proper relief in the premises.
k
ML C Mew/l
u
Attorney #28300-08
record, through personally delivery, ordinary mail with proper postage affixed or by service through the efiling system
and filed with Carroll Circuit Court, this _30'h day of January, 2023.
_
Mt? r MM
v
Attorney #28300-08
Filed: 2/13/2023 11:04 AM
STATE OF INDIANA ) 1N THE CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT

) SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL )
STATE OF INDIANA ) CAUSE NUMBER: 08C01-2210-MR00001

)
VS. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
STATE'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO CONTINUE BAIL HEARING

AND JURY TRIAL SETTING
respectfully informs the Court that the State does not object to the Defendant's Motion to
Continue Bail Hearing and Jury Trial Setting and in support of said motion states the following:
1. That Counsel for the Defendant filed a Motion to Continue Bail Hearing and Jury
Trial Setting on February 7th, 2023.
2. That the State has no objection to continuing the Bail Hearing currently set for
February 17'", 2023.

3. That the State has no objection to continuing the Jury Trial currently set for
March 20th, 2023.
4. That the State has no objection to having those matters reset to a date and time
that is convenient for all parties.

McLeland, and files their response to the Defendant's Motion and has no objection to the Court
granting said Motion to continue the Bail Hearing and the Jury Trial for this matter to a time
convenient for all parties and for all other just and proper relief in the premises.
fl/nrc 14W
V
Attorney #28300-08
record, through personally delivery, ordinary mail with proper postage affixed or by service through the efiling system
and filed with Carroll Circuit Court, this _13th day of February, 20 3.
_
'm'C
Attorney #28300-08
Filed: 12/30/2022 11:57 AM

)ss:
COUNTY OF CARROLL ) CAUSE NO. O8C01-2210-MR-000001
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
vs. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION FOR DISCOVERY AND REQUEST

FOR RULE 404 AND 405 EVIDENCE
The Defendant, by counsel, moves the State of Indiana to produce the following with
regard to the above captioned cause of action to-wit:
1. The names and last known addresses of persons whom the State of Indiana
intends to call as witnesses together with their written statements, recorded or taped statements,
Video taped statements, memoranda containing substantially verbatim reports of their oral
statements and memoranda reporting or summarizing their oral statements, including but not
limited to any person referred to as a "confidential informant" who offered up information that
may lead to the discovery of relevant information in this cause.
2. The names and last known addresses of persons known by the State of Indiana to
have knowledge pertinent to this cause of action but who the State of Indiana does not intend to
call as witnesses.
3. Any and all written or recorded statements and the substance of any oral
statements made by the accused, or by any other person alleging statements made by the
Defendant, regardless of whether the State of Indiana intends to call such persons as a witness or
indicates the person is a confidential informant, and a list of witnesses to the making and
acknowledgment of such statements.
4. Any and all reports or statements of experts or other individuals who conducted
any test, experiment, examination, or comparison, made in connection with this particular case,
including results of physical or mental examinations and of scientific tests, experiments or
comparisons, whether the State intends to use these reports or statements or not.
5. A statement as to whether the Defendant, or any other person who participated in
the alleged crime, was acting directly or indirectly at the investigation, or on the behalf of the
State of Indiana, or one of its agents, and if so, state the names and addresses of said individuals.
6. A statement as to any consideration and benefits incurred or offered, the State of
Indiana has given or intends to give any witness, in exchange for his/her testimony, including but
not limited to monies paid, a change of prison accommodations and/or work station, or any state
action that could reasonably effect the witness' bias, and disclosure of any and all State action its
agents actions taken during the time the witness was cooperating.
7. The names and last known addresses of persons not intended to be called as the
State of Indiana's witnesses but who have been questioned or interviewed by the State of Indiana
or its agents in preparation of this case, together with their relevant written or recorded
statements, including memoranda reporting or summarizing their oral statements and any record
of prior criminal convictions.
8. Grand jury testimony of a witness, once he/ she has testified. Lockridge v. State,
263 Ind. 678, 338 N.E.2d 275 (1975).
9, A summary of any statement or conversation made by or engaged in by the
Defendant and overheard by any persons known to the State of Indiana and a list of any
witnesses who overheard such statements or conversations, together with any and all reports,
documents, correspondence and/or videotapes made or received, together with a statement in
writing as to whether there has been any electronic surveillance or recordings of conversation to
which the Defendant was a party.
10. A statement as to whether any telephone calls were made by the Defendant
following his arrest and whether the calls were taped or overheard by any persons known to the
State of Indiana. If the call was taped, produce the tape recording or if the conversation was
overheard, then produce a memorandum of the conversation overheard together with the names
and addresses of all persons overbearing such conversation or conversations.
ll. All phone records, books, papers, records, tapes, documents, photographs, video
tapes and other tangible objects and evidence which the State of Indiana may use in the
prosecution of this matter or which were obtained from or belonged to the Defendant, or any
witness, whether as substantive or demonstrative evidence.
12. A record of arrests, criminal convictions and juvenile records which may be used
of any witness who may be called by the State of Indiana, including but not limited to, the
Defendant.
13. A record of arrests, criminal convictions and juvenile records which may be used
of any Witness who is listed on the defense witness list, including but not limited to, the
Defendant.
14. True copies of all written case reports and all other written reports, notes,
memoranda, maps, drawings or diagrams, written, drawn or otherwise prepared by the County
Sheriff's Department, City Police Department, Indiana State Police Department, the Federal
Bureau of Investigation, the County Medical Examiner's Office, and any other law enforcement
agency or any private individual in connection with or pertaining to the investigation of the
crime charged against the Defendant.
15. A list of dates and times that the Defendant appeared in any lineups either in
person or in a photo array, the names and addresses of persons who appeared in each of the
lineups or photo arrays with the Defendant, the names and addresses of any persons who viewed
the lineups or photo array as alleged witnesses or victims and what each of those persons stated
regarding identification afier Viewing the lineups or photo arrays.
16. A statement as to whether or not the Defendant, any vehicle in which he had an
interest or his residence were searched following his arrest either with or without a Search
Warrant and, if so, a statement of information contained and the items seized as a result of the
search. In addition, if the search was made pursuant to a Court authorized Search Warrant,
produce a copy of the Search Warrant together with a copy of the Return. Further a statement
regarding all areas searched in the investigation of this case, and a statement of information
contained and the items seized as a result of the search. If the search was made by a court
authorized search warrant, produce a copy of the warrant together with a copy of the return and a
transcription of testimony at the probable cause hearing to obtain the search warrant. If any
search was made by consent, produce a copy of the consent to search form. With regards to all
searches made in connection with this investigation, produce all reports, receipts, inventories,
documents, tapes, and other tangible objects and evidence collected, along with a statement
concerning where the evidence is currently stored.
17. A statement in writing by the Prosecuting Attorney that he has or has no
information touching upon any matter of law or fact favorable to and/or exculpatory of the
Defendant or a written memorandum of such favorable or exculpatory information.

18. Any and all evidence in the possession or control of the State of Indiana or its
agents which may be favorable to the Defendant and material to the issue of guilt or punishment
or could reasonably weaken or affect any evidence proposed to be introduced against the
Defendant or is relevant to the subject matter or the charge filed herein or which in any manner
may aid the Defendant in the ascertainment of the truth.
19. Any and all demonstrative exhibits prepared by the State, its agents or experts,
including but not limited to animations, charts, experiments, maps, reenactments.
20. Any report by any cellular carrier whose records were obtained to determine the
location of where calls originated or were received by the identification of cellular tower sites.
21. Copies of any and all documents and audio/video records pertaining to any
completed 0r ongoing litigation (whether threatened or filed in a court of law) involving the
Carroll County Sheriff" s Department, Tobe Leazenby, Tony Liggett, Michael Thomas or any
other law enforcement or civilian employee who was named as a potential witness or participant
in said litigation including, but not limited to, any negotiated settlement agreements resulting
from said litigation.
22. Copies of any and all personnel files of Tobe Leazenby, Tony Liggett, and
Michael Thomas related to their employment with the Carroll County Sheriff Department.
23. Copies of any and all documents and audio/Video records pertaining to any
completed or ongoing litigation (whether threatened or filed in a court of law) involving the
Carroll County Sheriffs Department and the processing of any evidence in any criminal
investigation dating back to February l3, 2017.

24. A complete list of any individuals who assisted in any way, with the investigation
associated with the crimes alleged in this case, including the name, address and contact
information of all individuals.
25. Documentation, photos, Videos and/or audio recordings associated with any
viewings facilitated by law enforcement authorities at or near the Freedom Bridge/Monon Trail
involving persons of interest, suspects, or witnesses associated with the criminal charges lodged
against Richard Allen in this matter.
26. Pursuant to Rule 404 of the Indiana Rules of Evidence, you are requested to state
the general nature of any evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts of the Defendant or any
anticipated defense witness which the State intends to offer for any purpose, and state which
exception the State would rely upon as contained in the Indiana Rules of Evidence Rule 404(b),
for its admission. You are also requested to supply the names and last known addresses of all
witnesses that may be called to testify as to any evidence of other crimes, wrongs or acts of the
Defendant or any defense witness, and specify the other crime, wrong or act to which each
witness may be testifying.
27. Pursuant to Rule 404 of the Indiana Rules of Evidence, you are requested to state
the general nature of any evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts of any witness which the
State may call to testify in this matter for any purpose.
28. Pursuant to Rule 405 of the Indiana Rules of Evidence you are requested to
provide the undersigned with any and all relevant specific instances of conduct to be used by the
State in cross examination relative to evidence of character or a trait of character of any person
which is material to any of the criminal charges in this cause.

29. A copy of any information collected by or in the possession of the Prosecutor or
his/her office pertaining to or informing him/her regarding any prospective jurors that might be
called to serve in this case.
The disclosure and production shall be made without regard to whether the evidence to be
disclosed and produced is deemed admissible at the trial herein. A11 responses shall be
reasonably supplemented, corrected or amended when additional and/or different information
and material becomes available.
/
drama! A. Rozzi. #2336509
Counsel for Defend
of this document by the County efiling system upon
the Carroll County Prosecutor's Office and Andrew J. Baldwin the @g/éflay of December,
2022.
radley 1 #23365-09
HILLMILLIS. ROZM DE
ourth Street
Log spw 46947
574-722-4560
'
Filed: 2/7/2023 7:54 AM

)ss:
COUNTY OF CARROLL ) CAUSE NO. 08C01-22lO-MR000001
STATE OF INDIANA )
VS.
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO CONTINUE BAIL HEARING

AND JURY TRIAL SETTING
Comes now the Defendant, Richard M. Allen, by Counsel, Bradley A. Rozzi,

and respectfillly requests that this Court continue the bail hearing and jury trial currently
scheduled in this matter. In support of said Motion, Defendant Allen states as follows:
1. On November 21, 2022, Defendant Allen filed his Petition to Let Bail. Said
Petition is scheduled for hearing on February 17, 2023, at 10:00 a.m.;
2. The defense has yet to receive the entirety of discovery from the State and
therefore, is not yet prepared to proceed with the bail hearing;
3. The defense anticipates receiving the remaining discovery by the end of this
week;
4. Defense Counsel believes that the volume of discovery is such that there will
not be adequate time to review the discovery in preparation for the bail hearing;
5. Defendant Allen respectfully requests that the bail hearing scheduled on
February l7, 2023, be lifted and reset on a date and time convenient for the Court and
the parties;
6. Defendant Allen also acknowledges that the jury trial is scheduled in this
cause on March 20, 2023. The exchange and review of discovery, as referenced above,
HILLIs. HILLIS,
ROZZI & DEAN. LLc will necessitate that the jury trial be lifted and reset on a date and time convenient for all
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST.
parties; and
(574] 7224560
FAX1574) 722.2659
7. Wherefore, Defendant Allen requests that both the bail hearing and jury trial
JOHN R. HILms dates be lifted and reset on dates and times convenient for the Court and the parties.
1.1). #753309
BRADLEY A. Rozzx
1.13. #2336509
BRADEN J. DEAN
1.1). "31941-34
B ylA,&{ozzL#f 65-09
I certify that I have served a copy of this document by the Co '
system upon the Carroll County Prosecutor's Office and w J. Baldwin t 7th
day of February, 2023.
radley . Rozzi, #23365-

H , IS, 0 & DEAN
200 F0
574-722-4560
HILLIS. HILLIS.
30221 & DEAN. LLc
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST.
mANSPORT. IN 46947
(574) 722-4580
FAX (574] 122-2659
JOHN R. Hmus
1.)). 31533.09
BRADLEY A. Rozz1
1134;233:1509
.BRADEN J. DEAN
LI). mun-34
Filed: 6/19/2023 9:48 PM

) SS:
STATE OF INDIANA, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN, )
)
Defendant. )
APPEARANCE BY ATTORNEYS IN A CIVIL CASE

1. The undersigned attorneys now appear in this case for the following non-party member(s):
Indiana Department of Correction
Name, address, and telephone number of party (see Question #5 below if this case involves a
protection from abuse order, a workplace violence restraining order, or a no-contact order):
Name: Indiana Department of Correction

Address: 302 W. Washington Street, Rm. W341
Telephone: 317-234-9515
2. Attorney information for service as required by Trial Rule 5(B)(2):

Name: Aaron M. Ridlen Attorney No.: 31481-49
Address: OFFICE OF INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL TODD ROKITA
Indiana Government Center South, 5th Fl.
302 West Washington Street
Indianapolis, IN 46204-2770
Telephone: (317) 232-2826
Fax: (317) 232-7979
E-Mail: Aaron.Ridlen@atg.in.gov
Each attorney listed on this appearance:
(a) certifies that the contact information listed for him/her on the Indiana Supreme Court
Roll of Attorneys is current and accurate as to the date of this appearance;
(b) acknowledges that all orders, opinions, and notices from the court in this matter that are
served under Trial Rule 86(B) will be sent to the attorney at the e-mail address(es)
specified by the attorney on the Roll of Attorneys regardless of the contact information
listed above for the attorney; and
(c) understands that he/she is solely responsible for keeping his/her Roll of Attorneys contact
information current and accurate, see Ind. Admis. Disc. R. 2(A).
3. This is a MR Case Type under Administrative Rule 8(B)(3).

4. This case involves support issues: No.
5. This case involves a protection from abuse order, a workplace violence restraining order, or a
no-contact order: No.
6. This case involves a petition for involuntary commitment: No.
7. There are related cases: No.
8. Additional information required by Local Rule: Not applicable
9. There are other party members: No.
10. This form has been served on all other parties and Certificate of Service is attached: Yes.
THEODORE E. ROKITA
Attorney General of Indiana
Attorney No. 18857-49
Date: June 19, 2023 By: s/ Aaron M. Ridlen

Aaron M. Ridlen
Deputy Attorney General
By: s/ Hannah M. Deters

Hannah M. Deters
OFFICE OF INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL TODD ROKITA

302 West Washington Street – IGCS – 5th Floor
Telephone: (317) 232-2826
Facsimile: (317) 232-7979
E-mail: Aaron.Ridlen@atg.in.gov
2
I certify that on June 19, 2023, the foregoing document was served upon the following
person(s) via IEFS, if Registered Users, or by depositing the foregoing document in the U.S. Mail,
first class, postage prepaid, if exempt or non-registered user.
Bradley Anthony Rozzi Nicholas C. McLeland

200 Fourth St. Carroll County Prosecutor
Logansport, IN 46947 101 W. Main Street
Attorney for Defendant Delphi, IN 46923
Andrew Joseph Baldwin

BALDWIN PERRY & KAMISH, P.C.
150 N Main Street
Franklin, IN 46131
Attorney for Defendant
By: s/ Aaron M. Ridlen

Aaron M. Ridlen

Telephone: (317) 232-2826
Facsimile: (317) 232-7979
3
APPEARANCE FORM –CONTINUATION PAGE
Case Number: 08C01-2210-MR-00001
First Name in Case Caption: STATE OF INDIANA
Continuation of Item # 2:
Name: Hannah M. Deters Attorney No.: 36303-29

Address: OFFICE OF INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL TODD ROKITA
Indiana Government Center South, 5th Floor
Telephone: (317) 234-8634
Fax: (317) 232-7979
E-Mail: Hannah.Deters@atg.in.gov
4
Firefox https://www.inpcms.org/
APPEARANCE FORM
Case Number; 08001-2210-MR- I
1. Name of Defendant: Richard M. Allen
2. Case Type of proceeding: Murder

3. Prosecuting Attorney information:
Nicholas C. McLeland Attorney No. 283 00-08

Name:
Shane M. Evans Attorney No. 345 82-08
Address: Courthouse, 2nd Floor Phone: (765) 5 64-45 14

101 W. Main Street, Suite 205 FAX: (765) 564-1871
Delphi, IN 46923
4. Will the State accept service by FAX: Yes

5. Arrest report number (Originating Agency Case Number): Not Available
6. Transaction Control Number: Not Available
State I.D. Number: Not Available
7. Additional information required by state or local rules:
L...
NOV
V 23 2022
CLERK
%wn8 AW
CARROLWCIRCUIT COURT
1 of 1 11/23/2022, 9:19 AM
Filed: 11/14/2022 2:49 PM
APPEARANCE
(PUBLIC DEFENDER)
Case Number: 08C01-2210-MR-000001
Caption: STATE OF INDIANA VS. RICHARD M. ALLEN
// Check if Pro Se. NOTE: This form is not required for pro se protective orders.
1. RICHARD M. ALLEN
(Name or names of responding party/parties)
2. Address of pro se responding party or parties (as applicable for service of process):
Name: Name:
Address: Address:
3. Attorney information (as applicable for service of process):
Name: Bradley A. Rozzi Atty Number: 23365-09

Address: 200 Fourth St. Telephone: 574-722-4560
Logansport, IN 46947 Fax: 574-722-2659
Computer Address: brozzi30@yahoo.com
4. Will accept FAX service: Yes ___ No __X__
/s/ Bradley A. Rozzi

Bradley A. Rozzi, I.D. # 23365-09
HILLIS, HILLIS, ROZZI & DEAN
Certificate of Service
I certify that I have served a copy of this document by the County e-filing system upon
the Carroll County Prosecutor’s Office the 14th day of November, 2022.
/s/ Bradley A. Rozzi

Bradley A. Rozzi
200 Fourth Street
574-722-4560
Filed: 11/28/2022 9:40 PM

)ss:
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
v. )
)
RICHARD ALLEN )
VERIFIED MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE FROM THE COUNTY
Comes now the accused, Richard Allen, by and through counsel Brad Rozzi
and Andrew J. Baldwin and pursuant to Criminal Rule 12(A) of the Indiana Rules
of Criminal Procedure, requests that this court change venue from Carroll County.
In support of said motion, the accused and his counsel swears and affirms the
following:
1. On October 28, 2022 the State of Indiana filed a probable cause affidavit
and charging information alleging that Richard Allen murdered “Victim 1
and Victim 2” on or about February 13th, 2017.
2. That the allegations stem from the highly publicized death of two Carroll
County teenagers.
3. That even before Richard Allen had been accused of these crimes, the
matter had been highly publicized.
4. The extensive media attention began while the victims were missing.
5. The extensive media attention continued after the victims were found.
6. The extensive media attention continued for the next 80 months (5+
years) in a variety of formats, until Richard Allen was arrested:
a. Coverage on local, statewide, and national television media.

b. Coverage on local, statewide and national print media.
c. Coverage on several podcasts that reach local, state, national and
international audiences.
d. Coverage on the internet in a variety of social media platforms,
including Twitter, Reddit, YouTube and Facebook.
7. The media coverage included multiple press conferences by state and local
authorities, including press conferences in which the elected prosecutor
participated.
8. The extensive media attention continued after Richard Allen was

arrested, including the following:
a. Coverage on local, statewide and national television media.

b. Coverage on local, statewide, national and international print
media.
c. Coverage on a variety of social media platforms, including Twitter,
YouTube, Reddit and Facebook.
9. After the arrest of Richard Allen, a press conference was held by state and
local authorities.
10. Although it could be argued that the amount of publicity that this
particular case has received in the past 5+ years will make it difficult to
find a jury that has not heard of this case, Richard Allen’s defense team
has gleaned statistical data that would strongly indicate that moving the
case/trial just 150 miles away would significantly reduce the likelihood of
obtaining a tainted jury pool.
11. That since his arrest, data procured from “Google Trends” and “Google
Ads” details the amount of internet interest through Google searches for
“Richard Allen” and the data is quite telling:
a. During the month of October, the search for “Richard Allen” in

Carroll County ranged between 1,000 and 10,000 searches for a
county with just over 20,000 residents.
b. On average, around one in every two (50%) of Carroll County

residents have conducted on-line searches of Richard Allen during
the month of October following his arrest.
c. Comparatively speaking, Fort Wayne is a city with over 260,000

residents, roughly thirteen times the size of Carroll County. In the
month of October, following his arrest, the average monthly
searches for “Richard Allen” in Fort Wayne ranged between 1,000
and 10,000 searches.
d. On average, therefore, 1 in every 26 (3.8462%) residents in Fort
Wayne have performed an on-line search of “Richard Allen”
compared to one in every two (50%) residents of Carroll County
conducting the same internet search of “Richard Allen” after his
arrest.
e. Fort Wayne is less than 100 miles from Delphi but in that 100
miles, internet searches fell from roughly 50% of residents in
Carroll County googling “Richard Allen” to less than 5% of residents
googling “Richard Allen. This would mean that Carroll County
residents have searched “Richard Allen” over ten times more often
than those residents in Fort Wayne, a city less than 100 miles from
Delphi. Presumably, jury pools from counties even farther away
would have searched “Richard Allen”
12. In addition, according to various sources, as many as 300 people were

actively involved in the search of the two victims while they were missing.
13. The 2022 population of Delphi Indiana is under 3,000 residents and
therefore it may be the case that as much as roughly 10% of the Delphi
population was actively involved in participating for the search of the
victims and presumably, therefore, arguably heavily invested in the
matter and the outcome of the case.
14. Those involved in the search for the victims, in addition to showing a
strong investment in the case, arguably could be called as a witnesses, or
(at a minimum) their involvement in the search should prevent them from
serving on the jury as they may have information concerning the layout of
the area searched that could infect the jury, and have opinions based upon
their involvement in the search for the victims.
15. Additionally, arguably any of the family and friends of anyone involved in
the search for the victims could be tainted as well from serving on a jury.
16. Additionally, many Carroll County residents have been involved in some
aspect of this case, whether it be in an investigative capacity (police), or as
fact-witnesses that could be called as witnesses in the case, or those that
searched for the victims, or residents who simply are interested in the
matter and have conducted their own independent investigation.
17. Additionally, because of the small number of residents in Carroll County,

juxtaposed against the large percentage of the population that may have
been involved in one of the capacities detailed in the previous paragraph,
the likelihood for a tainted jury pool is excessive.
18. During the five years following the disappearance of the victims, the
Indiana State Police and other law enforcement agencies established an
active command post in Delphi to conduct interviews and press
conferences, all of which increased the interest in the investigation. This
increased exposure lends itself to the tainting of jurors and increased
possibility of a biased jury panel.
19. While it is impossible for the defense to accurately predict (having

received only minimal discovery), it is likely that the law enforcement
investigation has conducted possibly hundreds of interviews of potential
witnesses and other community members that may or may not have
information regarding the crime. Again, the raw number of people in the
Carroll County community directly or indirectly involved with the
investigation, juxtaposed with the small number of residents in Carroll
County, render it impossible to find jurors without connection to the case
or to someone involved in the case or without pre-conceived notions about
Richard Allen’s guilt or innocence.
20. Presumably, residents from other counties around Indiana (especially

further away from Carroll County) will not include any residents who are
fact witnesses or friends and family of fact witnesses or those involved in
the investigation or those that have conducted their own investigation or
participated in the search of the victims or who have entrenched opinions
on the case based upon, in part, their knowledge of witnesses or facts from
the case.
21. It is common sense to presume that residents from counties further away
from Carroll County will not have the same level of investment in the case
and therefore will be able to more fairly decide the matter without concern
about how their verdict may affect their relationships with other Carroll
County residents.
22. Additionally, the amount of media coverage of the case has been so
extensive that the Court was compelled to engage numerous law
enforcement personnel to ensure the safety and security of all actors,
including the accused, from any actual or perceived threats of harm that
surrounded a somewhat simple pretrial hearing in this case. Subjecting
potential jurors to such an environment in what may be a multi-week trial
would undoubtedly distract jurors to a point that impartiality could not be
obtained.
23. Additionally, the fact that the prosecutor requested that the probable
cause afidavit be sealed. and that the original sitting judge sua sponte
recused himself from the case, is anecdotal evidence that both the
prosecutor and prior judge also recognize the magnitude of interest and
publicity in this case and the practical problems associated with the
interest and publicity in Carroll County.
24. Additionally, Richard Allen was a community member who, for many
years, worked at CVS in Delphi. As CVS is the type of business that is
commonly visited by the general public, Richard Allen would have come in
close contact with many of the Delphi and Carroll County citizens,
creating another real concern of a high probability of bias among potential
jurors in Carroll County.
25. That Richard Allen's defense team believes the best means to avoid a
tainted jury pool and to receive a fair venire for both sides would be to
venue the matter to a county at least 150 miles fiom Carroll County and
to conduct the jury trial in the chosen county.
I swear under penalties ofpezjuzy that the statements contai'ned in this pleading
are true and accurate to the best ofmy knowledge.
WWar len
A/\
vv
drew J dwin
Attorne for ichard Allen
This is to certify thata copy of the foregoing pleadin as been provided to

vianEFWe
counsel of record for the opposing party, V day of filing
drew J. Baldwin
Filed: 11/14/2022 1:58 PM
CO-COUNSEL APPEARANCE FORM (CRIMINAL)

Defendant
COURT: CARROLL COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
CASE NUMBER: 08C01-2210-MR-000001
1. Name of Defendant(s): Richard M Allen
2. Defense attorney information (as applicable for service):
CO-COUNSEL:
Andrew J. Baldwin Atty. No. 17851-41 andrew@criminaldefenseteam.com

150 N. Main Street
Franklin, Indiana 46131
Phone: 317-736-0053
Fax: 317-816-4791
3. Will Defendant accept fax service: Yes
4. Additional information required by State or Local Rule: N/A
/s/ Andrew Baldwin

Andrew Baldwin
This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing pleading has been provided to all
counsel of record via IEFS this same day of filing.
/s/ Andrew Baldwin

)SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL) CAUSE NO. 08C01-2210-MR-000001
)
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
v. )
)
RICHARD ALLEN )
ORDER
Comes now Defendant, by counsel, having filed Moton to Convert Let Bail
Hearing into Suppression Hearing, and the Court being duly advised in the
premises, now finds that this motion should be GRANTED.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the Let
Bail Hearing scheduled for June 15, 2023 at 8:30 a.m. be converted into a
Suppression Hearing.
Date: ________________
Frances C. Gull, Special Judge
Distribution:
Carroll County Prosecutor’s Office
BALDWIN PERRY & WILEY, P.C.
Filed: 5/19/2023 4:43 PM

)SS:
)
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
v. )
)
RICHARD ALLEN )
MOTION TO CONVERT LET BAIL HEARING

INTO SUPPRESSION HEARING
Comes now the Accused, by counsel, and moves this Court to convert the
hearing, that is currently scheduled for June 15, 2023, from a Let Bail Hearing
into a Suppression Hearing. In support of this motion, the Accused states the
following:
1. That currently, this matter is set for a Let Bail Hearing on June 15,
2023.
2. For a variety or reasons, counsel for the Accused requests that the Let
Bail Hearing be converted to a Suppression Hearing.
3. That the Accused files contemporaneously his Motion to Suppress
Fruits of the Search of 1967 North Whiteman Drive, Delphi, Indiana.
4. That counsel for the Accused believes that a hearing on said motion
should last no more than four (4) hours in terms of testimony and
argument that the defense will be presenting.

WHEREFORE, the Accused requests this Court to convert the hearing
currently scheduled for June 15, 2023 from a Let Bail Hearing to a Suppression
Hearing.
/s/ Andrew Baldwin

Andrew Baldwin, Atty. No.17851-41
Counsel for Defendant
150 N. Main St.
317-736-0053
This is to certify a copy of the foregoing pleading has been provided to all
counsel of record for the opposing party, via IEFS this same day of filing.
/s/ Andrew Baldwin

“WW 7773
Mew
mam/7719:3757“
'JSIAZVW fWa'J/JTI
m—
WWO
iWWVWWfiWa/“yrwg—Twm' 3‘71:
UL? 171”“?F‘be/Qfxw WOJVI H
‘“
{11:0
"
""’W§f‘€/ 7,7737
W
Vmp
497
~~~Izzwm
$777}; Jélfiby/
szCZY J’TO;
’
Wuvjafiwlfvy
4/ rm W’W)u{
75'797)”
’ i/(yvtV/WQYJ J?“
)V/Pf/y '/,LW477W—
'
7;," a);
XWKPVF‘I @7731)? 1’39; #97 311?, PM 797 Gib,

D'
UVFV‘O
1/305rm
37””
Voifvw)’ /‘9(>m{f Wbifgw< 372:
#777 Wham W or; -/- WWW;
m
2‘77 °U 7,937 I—
_,
g
V7735!” W—Ffl/jifipinvm '
¢Pflffvdx>my
"
Kw J56 UWwam/au ruff. '
WWI/€77,414?” ~07an
__—9Lf°72’79 If???
”96'WWW"! 4' w *
40
w?“I
7! V’ "““‘“
"3777(1713 437Aer
-_~'b:f‘ 3’7wltg'm/v / Wm 3/054 (11%;? 0+. :55; gm
£4297 U _ +
Est/«707 12% 9 X11914 97,4 740 War/{w ®Y+ ”79177

f‘f’WK/“V?” 2WD? 737+
I???”My (ff
I-m-oIfr/WWW W7 3% _.
J‘JYKTKW iJwfi'Wme7f/9Jj‘07 [’1

,
11
60
GE‘HJ
2202 AON
III I fiQfiIE
$ mhfi III {M
‘ llllil'l'lllill“ 5555$3359t
W N zwh m1 /,.1 JPC! V
WWWQS «want we 1|
”War; WWW:
W771! “”7
2202“) \ON 97516 M: *7/9W‘W
h. ’Mf/bf/b
225323 1 fl+rmW
..... . ZNQOE
0917 NI $11 iwn03§llHM
I0 gjlvw 12:
Kwofi
‘ l
A983N3 WW u/ ’a’
(a
, F5 5.
APR 2 8 2023
- -- - . .0222 (2521-02: (022.22;)CLERK GARRC?!

muffseé '
BgC'LJJ'ZT/jl 243~3~
- - .- _ _
.--22:12); 22- 2222-226 292'.-2/5542/1' _.wfl. Fe-
.
_- _
- -- --- 212 71.15.5122}!- 22w'2.'_ 2%222'. 1221291061152221--..-_-------.. --
- - -__-. -- 22. 1411222 2%2/

252229. 10525501. _ .- -... _-_-
- -_ - _ 22612712111752; 25 65225024122150/1220/2222 _..
- - _ .651101 2915223-- 22.2.2}? 29.112712222222212.-222 _. .-.-.----___.
_ -2 _ .-
.MESléfi.//C--<éflléfo 1.6125221: ..KEJVéVZGfil/fi. flgésfl'flg- .....-2----- -
... -.. ~- . ... 71.62.555.112:

(22222272225 Qficafls 122-4122226222- -- ---
29246£61€5__(29// 262héfldQ(_4?//la A 2122/17/23

.. 12.2.22..- 222.516-122.512 \2'232 2"-Z%Q2v2. 12:5
"x? - -
"-..H"... ...... _ ...-

_fifflj/
#7
-,__/2.1o2/.¢S_
2...$_.1222'92229__M_/{,3 zvzré/sz
222M2966_222 (25/6 29/ -/Q2._ Zo§1fl {9569221225_)._
____. _.«..~ _ ..- --- - -- ..-_-
. -. flRZ_0_7_ 222m2'224126/C-jgm22vm29/s («S/MR 205/ 4220/ ....-. -.._-_
..- _._ -W...-q.-- .....- .12.:2.Q$Z-fl2?5221222.24 24-111-126/2220/12/522.... .---..---.-
.._.. ~*_ .... -..... 1220/.-

é/[Qj 1m... Lg 2f.//_-/2-222.r25/2"' 2952-4115552..--
.... 2202572966 1.29Ué 221.220/5.1721515.-. (om/225.226- .222. 79-60-241.. _ ... _- -.._._ -.-..--
02". (2229
291-1522 JE._122
522/6951", _2?2_922122fr 0135255-_
.__..~-»-_.._..-.2. -- . 1H0"-92§§.cafl$ .-_ 715
22175?"129.5 2?aco2?o/ro/ 022 --.-...... .-
12222-25127. 71555-242211;
__..._ __.._.__.._..._... ....
mafibj._%cs& 2%2251_6- -..-
1221.522.
(gal-$5102.21- 2.4.2. -1211- 1tm56/2r21fi2J/15.-__-._-.-
-.-" -... _-
.------.
9/0225 40%4
25.51/0-2/2 _-_._... -_ .. _ _ _..__,._._ __ _.-...- ... .. __._._ _-_.
Z j
. . .. ...... _..2. ...... .-...-_.~.._ _._- -. _
Max
-- _::
A A
___
2232 «2»
-
'
99am!
_._ __ __ - -.._-_ __ _._--.
ygnac IMHQ
" " WWW" " " ' '
V727???) 224/?"
77I'VII6'W amswyfl//6y</5°y
,o'W
"WW"
{x77 3/0570?" 73/I'I'IIVW
Efi/Iwy
*2 82205 '3 [WVNO VWfiWFA'IQIW,OW '
330?17 V7 0"}WV#417 W'V 3'0/9'7'Glbl7'5'97 " " _-_.
"71%_N/ 79/V5'W/5' fVVV9/63I317)?
-._._ '
Qfigf'yyygz
[IIII'I'III'III ZqflWZ/p yoIbevy ffl'fmV?
___________ " ' "
"'9'"??? III 5'44'4
37?er['E'Of (23/9wa W45 ._ " '
r59. 775
3,73% 769%?'(TI0,yayyyby90" "QW'WQ 7Wli7/°":Z:
"III" I"IIIV'IVII'IIII 'CI/IIIIIIIIII'IE9.7'III VI
______ __
:20 IM'"?'%"'fi;wyy5'~6)*'y%7'ww9" @yIvI/ogn

IIIII-III III III III III/"III'9"W'I' W
agyzy/fiiyyaég 31§II=_"IIIVI,I7°Z7_VI~ "10%" 9%6'7; )'9
W
"---,IIIq-IIII IIIIIIIII 'I'VIIII'VI'VI'Z
""'II'V'I"'6IIII "0 .
7/3"?"7 I?"€yr§nrzxg
715' ,, IIIIII,
IIII III
"""I'I'IIIIVI'CI/III 9; W0)IIIII'IIIIII
,2I3a W 37/0'5 _._.-- __ _____ ,
yfl 3'50V997 flkfi/o'ya/flflp) /O/§/y' flW/O'V'I'yf'w ' "
Huh"_w'uwufy33? QAVV 749V" 79679270g fléffi/Spnfwg f0 _-_ "
Qty/QWSVO/VB/Pfi'ffl 9w/0/VV 9946'03I'a'y
"7W
_
7'96
WE'W'"_JP§ 3'37?" Pix/I7
________-____
"3?"??? fgWI'I'i/WI
" -_._-_
"527}?gfl0 WV fam_ o"9r377fl9y".%} .'7'0/025'5'5'67
_-___--_ '
_.__ _._ __._ _.__ _._
7,0 7"" ...
'03""/"0?V6/:521mb?
._.__... _ . __._.._....._.__._ __._.,
wwy
'23'6'd
9.
'
71W?) )1" ,5?" "0,9573% Busé'yywy (W 10353
fill??? gr/O-gw flag/V 3147;" 7M¢P§W$7'W"§>_33fi7V
W_fl9zedx£_¢zaiL£/§M.%.filuffi/lfifléfifgsal 315/
m. .- ,__ __ _. __
..._.5.
#275 Mal/W2: 57/, WW1
7/73"? 99// W055 /0££'
_.
90$ y-y "7?; (""9 574,1'605'3/'7-
W 8; '0
519; ("mg"Gg75'i703
95732""9#' 'KW "*"
"A? 9299'3/75' "29'
;_ .Z%.'_"Xff_w{/Z§'¥DR/§32/ T
xflfVj'ag/fl?
~
57W my'syny'y*'sz/W-yy£#""?qz'"33~b7f7x:>
_.,._....
./'\ --_.. .-_....
7!" yamsy/v?-w f/V'aflfi'Z'I/Vé'loz'o 314/1 9/
¥9Wmmfl*§7"2m9372¥/§97"3'W§%7 >77 54
v""""5""*/? fryWV WWW/erg A)" ragaa7
335' 94"273'973/ 5"%"}0&7€f'75'§/ 33W/a/
33¥76"%
'H'fiifi'flrWowfw'W' my 2m) B/A'W?7'7 7W
-'
5W3?'W'é"~-ng-o-é'm7-a7vyuyyayg7W'"'"p«¢e/"' fig}???
a" ywmy
"gimmra'cy; 'Ws'fisyDVW'yxvy'fwv "'
-
__
-'--
p7 477/9 7.9.9 fay-"é75ygi-37Wfi""yfl-'ijppZWgow-
wy/wve/ ysdyo'oéy'92yaé'77yéfi'fif"39uaz
yygflM?W"WW/M"7DW6%?y&/op Z
'7! MQW??2¢ A275_-7';?y W/'ty'fy'
/"'7'°7'7"" '"ff-*'oiQw797737WW/"W77575m'oya/
ZV'%/'V"'W gym/x 9'0 '9"9'0 :2 97/
260'
1:.
Name '0 56; URBAN {{L us POSTAGEMPHNEYnwes
""m" (Fm-2am:
569
W:I [M 34}
D.O.C.: 2022/ Location - :atxm 'S')'i.'f'-:i"$".'-:Z:' BM"?
INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION '5: 3533391 $ 000. 60°

WESTVILLE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY 0000377834 APR 25 2023
5501 South1100 West M
APR 2 8 2023
WESTVILLE, IN 46391
THIS IDENTIFIES THIS CORRESPONDENCE AS

9151mm'2'", o")
HAVING BEEN MAILED BY AN OFFENDER CLERK CARR " '
INCARCERATED AT THE ABOVE CORRECTIONAL
INSTITUTION. "WARNING" NOT RESPONSIBLE E292/?291'-/ (ad/k/ (/Efl/( 0/6 (-04/1?
FOR CONTENTS. ANY ENCLOSED MONEY ORDERS
332$.LMDAZ$§§EEESEE833332F°°AL
/ 0/ (4/ "7M 57'
054%, 1", V4723
I.
u
46923-159556
...
LE 4/
710/919__
'II'H'Iu""I-'I'III'II'IIIII'IuIIIIII"III"III'IW'IH'II'
WC
Filed: 11/23/2022 9:49 AM
EXHIBIT Carroll Circuit Court
1
STATE OF INDIANA ) IN THE CARROLL COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
) SS:
COUNTY OF MARION ) CAUSE NO. 08C01-2210-MR-000001
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
)
Defendant. )
MEDIA INTERVENORS’ POST-HEARING BRIEF SEEKING PUBLIC ACCESS

TO PROBABLE CAUSE AFFIDAVIT AND CHARGING INFORMATION
The Media Intervenors1 submit this Post-Hearing Brief following the November 22, 2022
public hearing (the “Public Hearing”) on the State’s Verified Request to Prohibit Public Access to
a Court Record (the “Motion”). This Post-Hearing Brief addresses three points in response to the
State’s arguments presented at the Public Hearing.
I. Media Intervenors Are Not Looking for A “Soundbite.”
During the Public Hearing, the State trivialized the media’s interests by referring to
“extraordinary lengths” taken to get a “soundbite.” The Media Intervenors’ interests are not so
trivial—quite the opposite. The media, as the Fourth Estate, serves the public by reporting on
matters of keen public interest (such as the Defendant’s arrest and charges), promoting
transparency, and holding the government accountable. See Cox Broad. Corp. v. Cohn, 420 U.S.
469, 495 (1975) (emphasis added) (“With respect to judicial proceedings in particular, the function
1
The term “Media Intervenors” refers to the following entities collectively: Indiana Broadcasters
Association, Inc.; Hoosier State Press Association, Inc.; The Associated Press; Circle City
Broadcasting I, LLC d/b/a WISH-TV; E.W. Scripps Company d/b/a WRTV; Nexstar Media Inc.
d/b/a WXIN/WTTV; Neuhoff Media Lafayette, LLC; Woof Boom Radio LLC; TEGNA Inc. d/b/a
WTHR; Gannett Satellite Information Network, LLC d/b/a The Indianapolis Star; and American
Broadcasting Companies, Inc. d/b/a ABC News.
1
of the press serves to guarantee the fairness of trials and to bring to bear the beneficial effects of
public scrutiny upon the administration of justice.”). When the government denies access to full
information, it is not only the media’s job, but its responsibility, to seek what little information it
can obtain. Full access would improve the depth of reporting, avoid misinformation, and promote
accountability.
In sum, the Media Intervenors’ newsgathering efforts should not be cast as a nuisance, or
worse, actively discouraged. Doing so would undermine the Media Intervenors’ federal and state
constitutional rights and Indiana’s public policy favoring access.
II. Concerns Regarding Safety and Further Investigations Do Not Warrant Exclusion.
The State during the Public Hearing acknowledged the public’s “right to know” but
suggested that the “cost” was too high to allow it. In so doing, the State downplayed the significant
costs of nondisclosure, as outlined above, which are central to democratic society.
In any event, the State’s arguments regarding the “costs” of disclosure do not rebut the
presumption of access. See Commentary to Rule 6 (explaining that Rule 6 “incorporates a
presumption of openness and requires compelling evidence to overcome this presumption”).
First, as to the State’s concern for the ongoing investigation: Though the State indicated
that actors other than the Defendant may have be involved in the alleged crimes, the State
apparently has conducted sufficient investigation as to the Defendant himself to charge him with
double felony murder. The State may continue investigating other actors while disclosing why the
Defendant was charged. The supporting information should not be kept under the rug for months
or years on-end.
Second, to the extent there is a concern for witness harassment or courtroom decorum, the
course of the Public Hearing demonstrated that the Court and law enforcement were well-equipped
2
to implement appropriate security measures, and the public was able to abide by the Court’s rules
for decorum. As for witnesses outside the courtroom setting, the State has already provided the
Court a copy of the Probable Cause Affidavit with their names redacted. At minimum, the Court
can (and should) release the redacted copy without compromising witness privacy.
III. These Proceedings Should Not Be Cloaked in Secrecy Until A Verdict.
Finally, the State’s concern for witness privacy suggests that the State may ask for future
hearings—or even the trial itself—to be blocked from public access. If the public is to accept the
ultimate result of any trial, this is not a realistic solution. See Richmond, 448 U.S. at 572 (“People
in an open society do not demand infallibility from their institutions, but it is difficult for them to
accept what they are prohibited from observing”). A public trial and public proceedings are
essential to ensure justice for the victims, fairness to the accused, and overall legitimacy of the
process. No matter the ultimate result, the public needs to be apprised of the process along the
way. If the Defendant is acquitted or enters into a plea agreement, the public needs to know why
to ensure the government is doing its job. If the Defendant is found guilty, the public needs to
know why to ensure that the government is delivering justice. There are too many instances in our
nation’s short history of criminal sanctions being handed down without appropriate process and
public oversight. This is not an occasion to return to that practice.
/s/ Margaret M. Christensen

Daniel P. Byron, # 3067-49
Margaret M. Christensen, # 27061-49
Jessica Laurin Meek, # 34677-53
DENTONS BINGHAM GREENEBAUM LLP
2700 Market Tower
10 West Market Street
3
Telephone: (317) 635-8900
Facsimile: (317) 236-9907
dan.byron@dentons.com
margaret.christensen@dentons.com
jessica.meek@dentons.com
Attorneys for Indiana Broadcasters

Association, Inc.; Hoosier State Press
Association, Inc.; The Associated Press;
Circle City Broadcasting I, LLC d/b/a WISH-
TV; E.W. Scripps Company d/b/a WRTV;
Nexstar Media Inc. d/b/a WXIN/WTTV;
Neuhoff Media Lafayette, LLC; Woof Boom
Radio LLC; TEGNA Inc. d/b/a WTHR;
Gannett Satellite Information Indiana
Newspapers, LLC d/b/a The Indianapolis
Star; and American Broadcasting Companies,
Inc. d/b/a ABC News
I hereby certify that on November 23, 2022, the foregoing was filed with the Clerk
of the Carroll County Circuit Court and served to all counsel of record via IEFS.
4
Filed: 6/19/2023 9:48 PM
EXHIBIT A
'

)ss:
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
vs. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
NOTICE OF DISCOVERY
serves upon the Indiana Department of Corrections, c/o Westville Correctional
Facility, 5501 S 1100 W, Westville, IN 46391, a Subpoena and Request for

Production to Non-Party to be answered within thirty (30) days from the date of
service. See attached.
AR for Defendant
76w
I certify that I have served a copy of this document by first class U.S. Mail,
Facility, 5501 S 1100 W, Westville, IN 46391 and by the County e-filing system upon
the Carroll County Prosecutor's Office and Andrew J. Baldwin, the 19th day of May,
2023.
HILLIs, HILLIS, Bridley A 'zzi. #23365

Rozzx & DEAN. LLc LLIWLIS. ROZW& DE
ATTORNEYS AT LAW O Street
200 MURTH ST.
LOGANSPORT. IN 46947 Loganspo 6947
(574) 722-4560
FAX (574) 722-2659
JOHN R. HILLIS
1.11:;153309
BRADIEY A. Rozzx
1.13. "3365-09
BRADEN J. DEAN
LD. 331941-34
EXHIBIT A
I

)ss:
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
vs. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
SUBPOENA
THE STATE OF INDIANA, TO THE SHERIFF, GREETINGS:

You are hereby commanded to summon the Indiana Department of
Corrections, c/o Westville Correctional Facility, 5501 S 1100 W, Westville, IN
46391, to permit Attorney, Bradley A. Rozzi, Attorney, Andrew J. Baldwin, and their
agents to enter onto the Westville Correctional Facility for the purpose of inspecting,
measuring, surveying, and photographing the individual cell block(s), and surrounding
facility, wherein Defendant Richard Allen has been continuously incarcerated since
November of 2022. Said event shall occur within thirty (30) days of the issuance of
this Subpoena as referenced below.
WITNESS, this {4%day of May, 2023.
HILLIS, HIL ZZI
B
Bra .Rozzi, A omey f Defendaht
Fourth Stree
ogansport, 46947
747 60
HILLIs, HILLIS,
Rozzx & DEAN. LLC
ATTORNEYS A'I' LAW
200 FOURTH ST.
(574) 722-4500
FAX I574) 722-2859
JOHN R. HILLxs
1.1). 137533.09
BRADLEY A. Rozzx
1.)). 923365.09
BRAJ)EN J. DEAN
1.1). 331941-34
EXHIBIT A
)ss:
STATE OF INDIANA )
vs. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION TO NON-PARTY

Pursuant to Trial Rule 34 (A)(2) of the Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure,
attorney Bradley A. Rozzi requests, Indiana Department of Corrections, c/o
Westville Correctional Facility, 5501 S 1100 W, Westville, IN 46391, a NonParty,
to produce and permit the examination of the following:
To permit entry onto designated land or other property in the possession or
control of the Indiana Department of Corrections (c/o Westville Correctional
Facility) for the purpose of inspecting, measuring, surveying, and
photographing the individual cell block(s), and surrounding facility, wherein
Defendant Allen has been continuously incarcerated since November of 2022
pursuant to the Safekeeping Order entered herein on November 3, 2022.
Attorney, Bradley A. Rozzi, Attorney, Andrew J. Baldwin, and their agent are
available to inspect the premises, upon reasonable notice, Monday through
Friday from 8:00 am. to 5:00 p.111. or on any other time convenient for the
Department of Corrections and Movants.
Bradley A. Rozzi requests that such production be made to Bradley A. Rozzi,

by mailing a copy of said documents to Bradley A. Rozzi, 200 Fourth Street,
Logansport, Indiana 46947.
This Request for Production is made pursuant to Trial Rule 34(C), and the
producing party is entitled to security against damages or payment of damages
resulting from this request and may respond to this request by submitting to its terms,
by proposing different terms, by objecting specifically or generally to this request by
HILLIS. IIILLIS.
RozzI & DEAN. LLc serving a written response or by moving to quash as permitted by Trial Rule 45(B).
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH S'l'.
LOGANSPOR'I'. IN 46947 Failure to respond to this Request for Production or to object to it or to move to
I574) 7224580
FAX (574) 722-2659 quash, as provided by the Indiana Rules of Civil Procedure within (3 O) days from its
J onN R. HILLIS
1.1). "7533.09 receipt, may subject producing party to a Motion for Sanctions, pursuant to Trial Rule
BRADLEY A. Rozzt of Trial Procedure.
LD. #2336509 37 of the Indiana Rules
BRADEN J. DEAN
1.0.931941-34
EXHIBIT A
HILLIS, HILLIS, ROZZI
By
ra A. Rozz' ttorn/ey for Defendant
0 F urth et
of this document by first class US. Mail,
Facility, 5501 S 1100 W, Westville, IN 46391 and the Carroll County Prosecutor's
Office, theMay of May, 2023.
Bra R0221 # 9
HILLI HIL OZ & DEAN
HILLIS. HILLIS.
R0221 & DEAN. LLC
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
200 FOURTH ST.
(574) 129,4560
FAX (574) 7292659
JOHN R. HILLIS
LD. 07533-09
BRADLEY A. R0221
1.1). #2336509
BRADEN J. DEAN
LD. #3194144
EXHIBIT A
STATE OF INDIANA CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT
COUNTY OF CARROLL, SS: CAUSE NUMBER 08C01-2210-MR- I
STATE OF INDIANA INFORMATION

VS
RICHARD M. ALLEN
L E
DOB: 9/9/1972
SSN: XXX-XX—3934 E I
ocr 282022
COUNT 1=
MURDER
@«Mm
CLERK ARROLL cmcun coum
a Felony I.C. 35-42-1-1(2)
Nicholas C. McLeland, being first duly sworn u on his oath, says that on or about February 13, 2017, in
the Countyof Carroll, the State of Indiana, Richar M. Allen, did kill another human being, to wit: Victim 1;
while committing or attempting to commit kidnapping of Victim l.
All of which is contrary to the form of the statute in such cases made and provided, to-wit: I.C.
35-42-1-l(2), and against the peace and dignity of the State of Indiana.
I afiirm, under the penalty of perjury as specified in I.C. 35-44.1-2-1, that the foregoing representations
aIC true.
/s/ Nicholas C. McLeland
Approved by me this date, October 27, 2022.
My term expires: December 31, 2022

Witnesses:
Kathy Allen Betsy Blair
Sarah Carbau h Kelsi German
Stephen Buck ey Matthew Clemans
Jeremy Clinton Dan C. Dulin
Josh Edwards Jay Harper
Brian Harshman Jerry Holeman
William Kauffers Tony Liggett
Wesley McWhirter Stephen Mullin
Melissa Oberg Terry Wilson
A.J. Smith David Vido Bench Warrant to issue; bond is set at $
A.S. R.V.
B.W.
Judge, Carroll Circuit Court

COUNTY OF CARROLL, SS: CAUSE NUMBER 08C01-2210-MR- I
STATE OF INDIANA INFORMATION

VS
RICHARD M. ALLEN
L
DOB: 9/9/1972
SSN: xxx-xx-3934
I
OCT 28
if.
2372
D
:
COUNT 2:
MURDER
Sbmamm
CLERK CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT
a Felony I.C. 35-42-1-1(2)
Nicholas C. McLeland, being first duly sworn u on his oath, says that on or about February 13, 2017, in
the Countyof Carroll, the State of Indiana, Richar M. Allen, did kill another human being, to wit: Victim 2;
while committing or attempting to commit kidnapping of Victim 2.
All of which is contrary to the form of the statute in such cases made and provided, to-wit: I.C.
35-42-1-1(2), and against the peace and dignity of the State of Indiana.
I aflirm, under the penalty of perjury as specified in I.C. 35-44.1-2-] , that the foregoing representations
are true.

Approved by me this date, October 27, 2022.
My term expires: December 31, 2022

Witnesses:
Kathy Allen Betsy Blair
Sarah Carbau h Kelsr German
Stephen Buck ey Matthew Clemans
Jeremy Clinton Dan C. Dulin
Josh Edwards Jay Harper
Brian Harshman Jerry Holeman
\Vllliam Kaufi‘ers Tony Liggett
Wesley McWhirter Stephen Mullin
Melissa Oberg Terry Wilson
A.J. Smith David Vido
A.S. R.V. Bench Warrant to issue; bond is set at $
B.W.

STATE or INDIANA . -
. fcARRoDL CIRCUIT COURT
COUNTY or CARROLL, ss: . cAUSENUMBER 08001-221071vm-01
STATE or INDIANA INFORMATION
"
-
'
vs
RICHARD M. ALLEN
DOB: 9/9/1972
SSN: m-Ior«3934
COUNT 1:
MURDER
aFelony LC. 35-42-1-1(2) .
Nicholas C. McLeland, being first duly sworn u on his Oath, '

on or- about February 13, 2017, in
the County of Carroll, the State of Indiana, Richard M. Allen, did ano'dIer human bemg, to Wit: Victim 1;
ssglsnthat;
"
while committing or attempting to commit kidnapping ofVictim l.
All of which is contrary to the form of the statute in such cases made and provided, to-wit: LC.
3542-1-10), and against the peace and dignity of the State.oflndiana.
under the penalty of perjury as specified in LC. 35-44. 1-2-1, that the foregoing representmions
areIatgrm,
.
ls! Nicholas C. McLeland

' - '
"' - ~»
Approved by me this date, October 27, 2022..
Myterm expires: December 31, 2022 _
Isl Nicholas 6. 'Mctém

Witnesses:
Bench Warrant to issue; bond is set at S

STATE OF INDIANA . CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT
COUNTY OF CARROLL, SS: CAUSE NUMBER 08001-2210-MR-01
STATE OF H'IDIANA DIFORMAI'ION
VS
'
RICHARD M. ALLEI'I
DOB: 9/9/1972
SSN: meat-3 934
COUNT 2:
MURDER
a Felony I.C. 35-42-1-1(2)
Nicholas C. McLeland, being first duly his 0 so 's that on or about February 13, 2017, in
the County of Canon, the State ofIndians, Ric M.
moi-33011 Allen, 'd another human being, to wit: Victim 2;
while committing or attempfing to commit kidnapping of Victim 2.
All of which is contrary to the form of the statute in such cases made and provided, to-wit: LC.
3542-1-10), and against the peace and dignity of the State ofIndiana.
I affirm, under the penalty-of peijm'y as specified in LC. 3544.1-2-1, that the foregoing representations
are true.
[5/ Nicholas C. McLeland

Approved by me this date, October 27. 2022.
My tenn expires: December 31, 2022

Isl Nicholas C. McLeland
'
Nicholas c. Mchland
Witnesses:
Bench Warrant to issue; bond is set at 3
Edge, Carroll Circuit Court

Filed: 11/21/2022 3:59 PM

) SS:
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
)
Defendants. )
LIMITED APPEARANCE BY ATTORNEYS
Party Classification: Initiating Responding Intervening X Substitution__
1. The undersigned attorney and all attorneys listed on this form now appear in this
case for the limited purpose challenging the provisional sealing of the probable cause
affidavit and charging information in the above-captioned cause pending the
November 22, 2022 public hearing on the matter. This limited appearance is on
behalf of the following party member(s):
INDIANA BROADCASTERS ASSOCIATION;

HOOSIER STATE PRESS ASSOCIATION, INC.;
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS;
CIRCLE CITY BROADCASTING I, LLC D/B/A WISH-TV;
E.W. SCRIPPS COMPANY D/B/A WRTV;
NEXSTAR MEDIA INC. D/B/A WXIN/WTTV;
TEGNA INC. D/B/A WTHR;
GANNETT SATELLITE INFORMATION INDIANA NEWSPAPERS, LLC D/B/A THE
INDIANAPOLIS STAR;
AMERICAN BROADCASTING COMPANIES, INC. D/B/A ABC NEWS;
NEUHOFF MEDIA LAFAYETTE, LLC; and
WOOF BOOM RADIO LLC
2. Applicable attorney information for service as required by Trial Rule 5(B)(2) and for case
information as required by Trial Rules 3.1 and 77(B) is as follows:
Name: Daniel P. Byron Attorney No.: 3067-49

Margaret M. Christensen Attorney No.: 27061-49
Jessica Laurin Meek Attorney No.: 34677-53
Address: DENTONS BINGHAM GREENEBAUM LLP

2700 Market Tower
Phone: 317-635-8900
22532345.v1
Fax: 317-236-9907
3. There are other party members: Yes No X (If yes, list on continuation page.)
4. If first initiating party filing this case, the Clerk is requested to assign this case the
following Case Type under Administrative Rule 8(b)(3):
5. I will accept service by FAX at the above noted number: Yes No X
6. This case involves support issues. Yes No X (If yes, supply social security numbers
for all family members on continuation page.)
7. There are related cases: Yes No X (If yes, list on continuation page.)
8. This form has been served on all other parties. Yes.
9. Additional information required by local rule: Not applicable.

Daniel P. Byron, #3067.49
Jessica L. Meek, #34677-53
Dentons Bingham Greenebaum LLP
2700 Market Tower
Telephone: (317) 635-8900
Facsimile: (317) 236-9907
Attorneys for Indiana Broadcasters Association,

Inc.; Hoosier State Press Association, Inc.; The
Associated Press; Circle City Broadcasting I, LLC
d/b/a WISH-TV; E.W. Scripps Company d/b/a
WRTV; Nexstar Media Inc. d/b/a WXIN/WTTV;
TEGNA Inc. d/b/a WTHR; Gannett Satellite
Information Indiana Newspapers, LLC d/b/a The
Indianapolis Star; American Broadcasting
Companies, Inc. d/b/a ABC News; Neuhoff Media
Lafayette, LLC; and Woof Boom Radio LLC
2
I hereby certify that on November 21, 2022, the foregoing was filed with the Clerk of the
Carroll County Circuit Court and served via IEFS.
3
Filed: 6/8/2023 4:47 PM
STATE 0F INDIANA ) IN THE CIRCUIT COURT

)ss:
CARROLL COUNTY ) OF CARROLL COUNTY
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
V. ) CAUSE NO. 08CO1-2210-MR1
)
RICHARD ALLEN )
LIMITED APPEARANCE BY ATTORNEY
Party Classification: Initiating _ Responding _ Intervening L Substitution_

1. The undersigned attorney listed on this form now appears in this case for the limited purpose
of requesting public access to court records. This limited appearance is on behalf of the
following party member:
MYSTERY SHEET LLC doing business as MURDER SHEET
2. Applicable attorney information for service as required by Trial Rule 5(B)(2) and for case
information as required by Trial Rules 3.1 and 77(B) is as follows:
Name: Kevin Greenlee

9783 E 116th Street #141
Fishers, IN 46037
kevinqreenlee@qmail.com
(317) 840-2252
3. There are other party members: Yes _

No LUf yes, list on continuation page.)
4. If first initiating party filing this case, the Clerk is requested to assign this case the following
Case Type under Administrative Rule 8(b)(3):
5. l will accept service by EMAIL at the above noted email address: Yfi

6. This case involves support issues. Yes _
No L (If yes, supply social security numbers for
all family members on continuation page.)
7. There are related cases: Yes _

No Laf yes, list on continuation page.)
ls/ Kevin Greenlee

Kevin Greenlee 22983-03
9783 E 116th Street #141
Fishers, IN 46037
kevinqreenlee@qmail.com
(317) 840-2252
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the State of Indiana, by
eSerVice, on the date of filing.
/s/KeVin Greenlee
Filed: 11/23/2022 9:49 AM

) SS:
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
)
Defendant. )
MEDIA INTERVENORS’ MOTION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE
The Media Intervenors,1 by counsel, respectfully submit this Motion for Leave to Intervene
in the above-captioned cause. In support, the Media Intervenors state the following:
1. On November 2, 2022, the Court entered its Order Acknowledging Public Hearing
(“Public Hearing Order”) on the State’s Verified Request to Prohibit Public Access to the Probable
Cause Affidavit and Charging Information.
2. That Public Hearing Order stated that the hearing would take place on November
22, 2022 (the “Public Hearing”) and would “be conducted pursuant to Ind. Code § 5-14-3-5.5 and
Indiana Rules of Court, Rules on Access to Court Records, Rule 6.”2
1
The “Media Intervenors” refer to the following entities collectively: Indiana Broadcasters
2
Rule 6 applies in “extraordinary circumstances” where a court record “that otherwise would be
publicly accessible” is requested to be excluded from public access. See Rule 6(A). Ind. Code § 5-
14-3-5.5 applies when the court receives a request to seal a public record that is “not declared
confidential under [Ind. Code § 5-14-3-4(a)]” (i.e. public records that are mandatorily excepted
from disclosure).
1
3. The Public Hearing Order further stated that “[p]arties or members of the general
public will be permitted to testify and submit written briefs, subject to reasonable time constraints
imposed by the Court.”
4. Consistent with the Public Hearing Order, the Media Intervenors filed a Prehearing
Brief and their counsel’s Appearances on November 21, 2022, in anticipation of being heard at the
Public Hearing based on (1) the permissive language of the Public Hearing Order and (2) Ind.
Code § 5-14-3-5.5(d), part of the Indiana Access to Public Records Act (“APRA”), which gives
“members of the general public” the right to “testify and submit written briefs” upon a request to
seal public records not mandatorily excepted from disclosure.
5. At the beginning of the Public Hearing, however, the Court stated that the Public
Hearing would be conducted pursuant to Rule 6 and not pursuant to APRA,3 therefore not
permitting the Media Intervenors to present argument.
6. Accordingly, the Media Intervenors now formally request leave to intervene in this
action for the limited purpose of challenging the State’s Verified Request to Prohibit Public Access
filed on October 28, 2022 and the provisional exclusion of the Probable Cause Affidavit and
Charging Information. See Richmond Newsp., Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555, 573 (1980)
(explaining that the media acts as “surrogates for the public” in seeking public access); see also
Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597 (1978) (“It is clear that the courts of this
3
Media Intervenors now understand that the Defendant and his counsel have indeed reviewed the
State’s Verified Request to Prohibit Public Access and Probable Cause Affidavit. Access by the
Defendant and his counsel indicates that the State’s Request was simply to exclude the documents
from public access rather than to seal the documents. See Access to Court Records Handbook at p.
53, Q1 (2020), available at: https://www.in.gov/courts/iocs/files/PublicAccessHandbook.pdf
(explaining the difference between records “not accessible for public access” and those “sealed
under statutory authority”).
2
country recognize a general right to inspect and copy public records and documents, including
judicial records and documents”).
7. The Media Intervenors also respectfully request that the Court, in recognition of the
media’s unique access interests, consider (1) its Prehearing Brief filed on November 21, 2022;4
and (2) their tendered Post-Hearing Brief (attached to this Motion as Exhibit 1). The tendered Post-
Hearing Brief is succinct and does not repeat the points made in the Pre-Hearing Brief. The purpose
of the Post-Hearing Brief is to respond to certain arguments made by the State during the Public
Hearing.
WHEREFORE, the Media Intervenors respectfully request that the Court:
(i) Grant them leave to intervene in the above-captioned cause for the limited
purpose of challenging the State’s Verified Request to Prohibit Public
Access filed on October 28, 2022 and the provisional exclusion of the
Probable Cause Affidavit and Charging Information;
(ii) Consider the Media Intervenors’ Prehearing Brief filed on November 21,
2022 and tendered Post-Hearing Brief (attached to this Motion) in ruling on
the State’s Verified Request to Prohibit Public Access filed on October 28,
2022; and
(iii) All other just and appropriate relief.
4
On November 22, 2022 following the Public Hearing, the Court entered its Order or Judgment
of the Court which “note[d] filing of a Limited Appearance by Attorneys” and the Pre-Hearing
Brief, further stating that the Court has taken this matter under advisement.
3

2700 Market Tower
Telephone: (317) 635-8900
Facsimile: (317) 236-9907

Gannett Satellite Information Network, LLC
d/b/a The Indianapolis Star, LLC d/b/a The
Indianapolis Star; and American
Broadcasting Companies, Inc. d/b/a ABC
News
4
Filed: 2/10/2023 4:25 PM

) SS:
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN, )
)
Defendant. )
MEDIA INTERVENORS’ RENEWED MOTION TO INTERVENE

AND MOTION TO GRANT PUBLIC ACCESS TO
THE STATE’S VERIFIED REQUEST TO PROHIBIT PUBLIC ACCESS
The Media Intervenors,1 by counsel, respectfully submit this Renewed Motion to Intervene
and Motion to Grant Public Access to the State’s Verified Request to Prohibit Public Access. In
support, the Media Intervenors state the following:
A. RENEWED MOTION TO INTERVENE
1. On October 28, 2022, the State filed its Verified Request asking the Court to
prohibit public access to the Affidavit of Probable Cause and Criminal Information pertaining to
the Defendant’s arrest and criminal charges (the “Request”). The Request was filed as a
confidential document and still remains confidential.
2. On November 2, 2022, the Court entered its Order Acknowledging Public Hearing
(“Public Hearing Order”) on the Request. The Public Hearing Order stated that the hearing would
1
1
“be conducted pursuant to Ind. Code § 5-14-3-5.5 and Indiana Rules of Court, Rules on Access to
Court Records, Rule 6” and that “[p]arties or members of the general public will be permitted to
testify and submit written briefs, subject to reasonable time constraints imposed by the Court.”
3. The hearing on the Request occurred on November 22, 2022. At the hearing, the
Court stated that Access to Court Records Rule 6 rather than Ind. Code § 5-14-3-5.5(d), part of the
Indiana Access to Public Records Act (“APRA”), governed. The Media Intervenors therefore were
not permitted to present argument at the hearing. Accordingly, following the hearing, the Media
Intervenors filed their Motion for Leave to Intervene with a Post-Hearing Brief attached.
4. On November 28, 2022, the Court issued its Order denying the Request, in part,
and denied the Motion for Leave to Intervene as moot.
5. The Media Intervenors now renew that Motion for Leave to Intervene with respect
to the public release of the Request. See Richmond Newsp., Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555, 573
(1980) (explaining that the media acts as “surrogates for the public” in seeking public access).
B. MOTION TO RELEASE THE REQUEST TO THE PUBLIC
6. In the November 28, 2022 Order, the Court found that “the State has failed to prove
by clear and convincing evidence that the Affidavit of Probable Cause and the Charging
Information should be excluded from public access” and that “the public interest is not served by
prohibiting access[.]” The Court, however, found that “the protection and safety of witnesses can
be ensured by redacting their names from the Affidavit, and that the defendant’s personal
information can be removed from the Charging Informations.”
7. The Court therefore ordered public release of a redacted Affidavit for Probable
Cause and Charging Information, submitted by the State at the hearing, with witness names and
the Defendant’s personal information redacted.
2
8. Shortly after, the redacted Affidavit for Probable Cause and Charging Information
were released publicly. The Request itself, however, still has not been released publicly and
remains confidential on the docket.
9. Access to Court Records Rule 6(A) permits the filing of “verified written request[s]
to prohibit Public Access to a Court Record,” as the State did here in filing its Request.
10. Rule 6(A) contemplates that requests to prohibit public access should not remain
excluded from public view forever. Such requests are only to be excluded temporarily until the
Court rules on the request: “When this request is made, the request and the Court Record will be
rendered confidential for a reasonable period of time until the Court rules on the request.” Rule
6(A) (emphasis added).
11. Because the Court has already ruled on the Request and denied the Request in-part
(with the exception of witness names and Defendant’s personal information), the Request itself
now should be released. There is no longer any legal basis or reason to exclude the Request—a
quintessential court record—from the public eye.2 See, e.g., Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435
U.S. 589, 597 (1978) (“It is clear that the courts of this country recognize a general right to inspect
and copy public records and documents, including judicial records and documents”).
WHEREFORE, the Media Intervenors respectfully request that the Court grant them
permission to intervene in this matter for the purpose of seeking release of the State’s Verified
Request to Prohibit Public Access to the public and order the clerk to release the Request to the
public.
2
The Media Intervenors acknowledge that the Request may contain witness names and the
Defendant’s personal information. If that is the case, consistent with the Court’s November 28,
2022 Order, the Media Intervenors would not object to a public version of the Request that has
witness names and personal information redacted only.
3

2700 Market Tower
Telephone: (317) 635-8900
Facsimile: (317) 236-9907
Attorneys for the Media Intervenors
I hereby certify that on February 10, 2023, the foregoing was filed with the Clerk of
the Carroll County Circuit Court and served to all counsel of record via IEFS.
4
Filed: 11/21/2022 3:59 PM

) SS:
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
)
Defendant. )
MEDIA INTERVENORS’ PRE-HEARING BRIEF SEEKING PUBLIC ACCESS

TO PROBABLE CAUSE AFFIDAVIT AND CHARGING INFORMATION
The Media Intervenors1 submit this Pre-Hearing Brief pursuant to the Court’s November
2, 2022 Order Acknowledging Public Hearing and urge this Court to grant public access to the
Probable Cause Affidavit and Charging Information because the public interest is best served by
public access to a prosecutor’s basis for filing criminal charges. It is impossible to know what basis
the State has alleged to support its Verified Request to Prohibit Public Access to a Court Record
(the “Motion”) because the Motion itself is excluded from public access pending the November
22, 2022 public hearing in this matter. However, it is unlikely that there is any justification to
warrant sealing the entire factual basis for charging the Defendant—particularly given the
substantial public concern regarding the unsolved and high-profile murder of two minors over five
years ago.
1
d/b/a WXIN/WTTV; Neuhoff Media Lafayette, LLC; Woof Boom Radio LLC; TEGNA Inc.
d/b/a WTHR; Gannett Satellite Information Indiana Newspapers, LLC d/b/a The Indianapolis
Star; and American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. d/b/a ABC News
1
This Court should grant public access and lift the provisional exclusion from public access
and sealing of the Probable Cause Affidavit and Charging Information. Doing so would further
the public’s right to access judicial records, which is particularly acute in these circumstances.
I. The Public and the Media Have a Substantial Right to Access Judicial Records
Based in Indiana Policy and the Federal and Indiana Constitutions.
In seeking public access, the media acts as “surrogates for the public.” Richmond Newsp.,
Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555, 573 (1980). The United States Supreme Court has aptly explained
the media’s important role:
[I]n a society in which each individual has but limited time and resources with
which to observe at first hand the operations of his government, he relies
necessarily upon the press to bring to him in convenient form the facts of those
operations. Great responsibility is accordingly placed upon the news media to
report fully and accurately the proceedings of government, and official records and
documents open to the public are the basic data of governmental operations. . . .
With respect to judicial proceedings in particular, the function of the press
serves to guarantee the fairness of trials and to bring to bear the beneficial
effects of public scrutiny upon the administration of justice.
Cox Broad. Corp. v. Cohn, 420 U.S. 469, 495 (1975) (emphasis added). Media Intervenors, on the
public’s behalf, seek access to the Probable Cause Affidavit and Charging Information to ensure
government transparency and accountability—which is especially critical in criminal matters. See
Nebraska Press Ass’n v. Stuart, 427 U.S. 539, 560 (1976) (explaining that the press is “the
handmaiden of effective judicial administration, especially in the criminal field” and a “guard
against the miscarriage of justice by subjecting the police, prosecutors, and judicial processes to
extensive public scrutiny and criticism”).
Consistent with these principles, the General Assembly expressly recognizes Indiana’s
“public policy . . . that all persons are entitled to full and complete information regarding the affairs
of government and the official acts of those who represent them as public officials and employees.”
2
Ind. Code § 5-14-3-1 (further explaining that the Access to Public Records Act (“APRA”) will be
“liberally construed to implement this policy” and that the burden for nondisclosure falls on the
public agency). Access to Court Records Rule 6 (hereinafter “Rule 6”), promulgated by the Indiana
Supreme Court, likewise “presume[s] . . . openness and requires compelling evidence to overcome
this presumption.” Commentary to Rule 6.
Apart from well-reasoned policy considerations, the public interest in accessing judicial
records has constitutional dimensions. Media Intervenors, as members and representatives of the
public, are presumptively entitled to judicial documents and proceedings under the First and
Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. See, e.g., Press-Enter. Co. v. Superior
Court, 478 U.S. 1, 11–12 (1986); see also Nixon v. Warner Commc’ns, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 597
(1978) (“It is clear that the courts of this country recognize a general right to inspect and copy
public records and documents, including judicial records and documents”).
The Indiana Constitution similarly (and perhaps more so) protects public access and key
newsgathering activities. See Ind. Const. Article 1, Section 9 (“No law shall be passed, restraining
the free interchange of thought and opinion, or restricting the right to speak, write, or print, freely,
on any subject whatsoever[.]”); Mishler v. MAC Systems, Inc., 771 N.E.2d 92, 97 (Ind. Ct. App.
2002) (recognizing that the Indiana Constitution “more jealously protects freedom of speech
guarantees than does the United States Constitution”). In light of Indiana’s Constitutional
protection of the free interchange of ideas, the Supreme Court has assumed that a “material burden”
on newsgathering ability could violate the Indiana Constitution. In re WTHR-TV, 693 N.E.2d 1,
15–16 (Ind. 1998).
Considering Indiana’s policy favoring public access and the constitutional implications of
restricting access to judicial records, the public’s and media’s interest in accessing judicial records
3
is not something to be taken lightly, and certainly should not be dismissed as a nuisance. This
strong public interest must be a primary consideration in resolving the State’s Motion.
II. The Public Interest Is Best Served When Probable Cause Affidavits and Charging
Information Are Made Available for Public Scrutiny.
Against this backdrop of deeply-rooted public access rights, probable cause affidavits and
associated charging information (such as those presently shielded in this case) are essential judicial
records uniquely worthy of disclosure. They contain key facts uncovered in criminal investigations
which are insulated from public involvement and ultimately result in the State’s charging
decisions. The public has a strong interest knowing why the State is charging a particular member
of the community for alleged crimes. See Greenwood v. Wolchik, 544 A.2d 1156, 1157 (Vt. 1988)
(“Public access to affidavits of probable cause is all the more important because the process of
charging by information involves no citizen involvement, such as is present with juries and grand
juries[.]”). Access gives the public answers to these vital questions.
Public access also serves as an important accountability tool, ensuring the fundamental
requirement of probable cause supports the arrest. See Com. v. Fenstermaker, 530 A.2d 414, 418
(Pa. 1987) (explaining that access to probable cause affidavits “would enhance the performance of
police and prosecutors by encouraging them to establish sufficient cause before an affidavit is
filed, would act as a public check on discretion of issuing authorities thus discouraging erroneous
decisions and decisions based on partiality, and would promote a public perception of fairness in
the arrest warrant process”); see also Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart, 427 U.S. 539, 587
(1976) (stating that “[s]ecrecy of judicial action can only breed ignorance and distrust of courts
and suspicion concerning the competence and impartiality of judges” and “free and robust
reporting, criticism, and debate can . . . subject[ ] [the criminal justice system] to the cleansing
4
efforts of exposure and public accountability”) (Brennan, J., concurring). Accountability, in turn,
promotes public trust, which is key to democratic society.
The history leading to the Defendant’s arrest, coupled with the nature of the underlying
alleged crimes (the murder of two children), underscores the need for transparency. See Matter of
T.B., 895 N.E.2d 321, 342 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (“[T]he death of any child is a matter of the keenest
public interest[.]”) (internal quotations omitted). These crimes have gone unresolved for years and,
apparently only recently, the investigation has gained traction. Yet the public has no idea how or
why the Defendant was arrested for the alleged crimes, no less how the investigative process led
to the Defendant’s arrest, or even how the State alleges the Defendant was involved in the murders.
These are critical issues squarely affecting the public interest. To the extent there is a concern that
the Defendant’s arrest was an unwarranted effort to satisfy public demand, making the charging
records available to the public will promote continued accountability and public trust in the
process. The public has a right to answers. See Richmond, 448 U.S. at 572 (“People in an open
society do not demand infallibility from their institutions, but it is difficult for them to accept what
they are prohibited from observing”).
III. The State Cannot Meet Its Burden to Seal the Records or Exclude them from Public
Access.
Rule 6 imposes a heavy burden on the State to exclude the Probable Cause Affidavit and
Charging Information from public access. In these “extraordinary circumstances,”2 the State must
show by “clear and convincing evidence” one of the following:
2
Rule 6 applies in “extraordinary circumstances” where a court record “that otherwise would be
publicly accessible” is requested to be excluded from public access. See Rule 6(A). The Court’s
Order Acknowledging Public Hearing dated November 2, 2022 explained that the public hearing
will be conducted pursuant to Rule 6 and Indiana Code § 5-14-3-5.5, the latter of which applies
when the court receives a request to seal a public record that is “not declared confidential under
[Ind. Code § 5-14-3-4(a)]” (i.e. public records that are mandatorily excepted from disclosure).
5
(1) The public interest will be substantially served by prohibiting access;
(2) Access or dissemination of the Court Record will create a significant risk of
substantial harm to the requestor, other persons or the general public; or
(3) A substantial prejudicial effect to on-going proceedings cannot be avoided

without prohibiting Public Access.
Rule 6(A), (D). To the extent the State seeks to go beyond exclusion from public access and seal3
the records under the Indiana Access to Public Records Act, the State must demonstrate all five
statutory factors by a preponderance of the evidence:
(1) a public interest will be secured by sealing the record;
(2) dissemination of the information contained in the record will create a

serious and imminent danger to that public interest;
(3) any prejudicial effect created by dissemination of the information cannot be

avoided by any reasonable method other than sealing the record;
(4) there is a substantial probability that sealing the record will be effective in
protecting the public interest against the perceived danger; and
(5) it is reasonably necessary for the record to remain sealed for a period of
time.
Ind. Code § 5-14-3-5.5 (emphasis added); see also Ind. Code § 5-14-3-1 (burden for nondisclosure
falls on the public agency).
Accordingly, Media Intervenors glean that the State is not claiming that the Probable Cause
Affidavit and the Charging Information must be sealed pursuant to a mandatory statutory
exception.
3
The Indiana Public Access to Court Records Handbook explains the difference between records
“not accessible for public access” and those “sealed under statutory authority” (such as under Ind.
Code § 5-14-3-5.5): “Records sealed under statute are more secure because no one is entitled to
view the records without court authorization. Records ‘not accessible for public access’ are only
secure from public access but may be viewed by court or Clerk staff and the parties to the case and
their lawyers.” Access to Court Records Handbook at p. 53, Q1 (2020), available at:
https://www.in.gov/courts/iocs/files/PublicAccessHandbook.pdf.
6
Though Media Intervenors do not have the benefit of reviewing the basis for the State’s
Motion to Seal, the Media Intervenors highly doubt that the State could meet its burden under
either Rule 6 or Indiana Code § 5-14-3-5.5 for two reasons. First, for the reasons stated above, the
presumed public interest in disclosure is paramount. The State must present clear and compelling
evidence favoring nondisclosure to rebut the presumption of access. Second, the Motion to Seal
apparently requests broad relief; the Probable Cause Affidavit and Charging Information are
currently excluded from public access and sealed in their entirety without even a redacted, public
version available on the Court’s docket. Yet both Rule 6 and Indiana Code § 5-14-3-5.5
contemplate that any exclusion or sealing order must employ the least restrictive means, and only
when absolutely necessary. See Rule 6(D) (order prohibiting public access must include, among
others, “[u]ses the least restrictive means and duration when prohibiting access”); Ind. Code § 5-
14-3-5.5(d)(3) (the State must show, among others, that “any prejudicial effect created by
dissemination of the information cannot be avoided by any reasonable method other than sealing
the record”). Even if the Court concludes that clear and compelling evidence requires certain
portions of the Probable Cause Affidavit and Charging Information to be sealed, a public, redacted
version should be released to the extent possible.
IV. Media Intervenors Request Expeditious Unsealing.
Should the Court conclude that the State has not rebutted the presumption of public access,
the Media Intervenors respectfully request that the Court unseal the Probable Cause Affidavit and
Charging Information and make them available for public access as soon as possible. A loss of
First Amendment rights, “for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable
injury.” See Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347, 373 (1976); see also Neb. Press Ass’n v. Stuart, 423
U.S. 1327, 1329 (1975) (“[E]ach passing day may constitute a separate and cognizable
7
infringement of the First Amendment.”). Accordingly, the Media Intervenors request expeditious
unsealing following the November 22, 2022 hearing.

2700 Market Tower
Telephone: (317) 635-8900
Facsimile: (317) 236-9907

Gannett Satellite Information Indiana
Newspapers, LLC d/b/a The Indianapolis
Star; and American Broadcasting Companies,
Inc. d/b/a ABC News
8
State of lndiana )
) SS: In the Carroll Circuit Court l N 0V 0 3 2022
County of Carroll )
State of Indiana fimf» 63514440

CLERK CARROLWCIHCUIT COURT
vs. Cause Number 08001-2210-MR-000001
Richard Matthew Allen
R uest b file Sheriff of Carroll Coun Indiana to Transfer Inmate from

Custod of the Sheriff to the Custod of the Indiana De artment of Co e
for Safekeeging
The undersigned states:
1. I am the duly elected Sheriff of Carroll County. Indiana.
2. The aforementioned defendant. Richard Matthew Allen. has been incarcerated

since October 26‘”, 2022, initially, at the Carroll County Jail, and then transferred
to the White County Jail. at my request as Sheriff of Carroll County, Indiana.
3. The defendant has been charged in a high profile cause, creating potential safety
and security concerns because of extensive coverage from an array of various
media platforms, both mainstream and social, throughout this state. the United
States, and the world.
4. ln that the defendant has been charged in said high profile cause. it is felt by the
undersigned. potential safety and security concerns exist involving not only the
defendant but also both jail facilities in Carroll and White Counties within the
State of Indiana.
5. Because of the aforementioned reasons. as Sheriff of Carroll County. Indiana. I
cannot provide the services. attention. or supervision necessary to protect or

meet the defendant’s needs or to insure. protect. and guarantee the safety or
security of the defendant, staff, or facilities.
6. Pursuant to Indiana Code 35-33-11-1. l respectfully request from the Court an

order approving and directing the transfer of the defendant to the custody of the
Indiana Department of Corrections. Said agency has agreed to accept custody of
the defendant for safekeeping.
7. As provided by lndiana Code 35-33-11-5, will be responsible for transporting, or

I
for coordinating transportation arrangements with the Indiana Department of

Corrections, the defendant to and from their respective facility for further Court
proceedings.
8. l certify to the best of my knowledge that the information set forth herein is true
and correct.
Daiewzflmh/MIZ 70a Ill-M

Tobe H. Leazenby/
Sheriff of Carroll County. Indiana
) SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL )
STATE OF INDIANA CAUSE NUMBER: 08C01-2210-MR-00001
)))))
E
VS.
RICHARD M. ALLEN Nov 22 2022

D
3222~,-;;'727W
'T COURT
MOTION FOR ORDER PROHIBITING THE PARTIES C0UN§E§BK19AWLL C RCU
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS. COURT PERSONNEL, CORONER, AND FAMIM
MEMBERS FROM D1SSEME~IATING INFORMATION OR RELEASING ANY
EXTRA-JUDICIAL STATEMENTS BY MEANS OF PUBLIC COMMUNICATION
Now comes Nicholas C. McLeland, Carroll County Prosecuting Attorney, being first duly
sworn upon his oath, and requests the Court to prohibit the parties, counsel, law enforcement
oficials, eom't personnel, coroner and family members fiom disseminafing information or
releasing any exua-judicial statements by means of public commmicafion. In support of said
request, the State shows the following:
1. That the State filed 2 counts of Murder against the Defendant on October 28th, 2022 in
Canoll County Circuit Court.
2. That the case has received extensive treatment in the local, national and international
news media.
3. That the media accounts concerning this cause have contained an Imdue number of
statements relating not only to the progress of the investigation, but conclusions of the
invesfigation, some of which have been untrue.
4. That it is reasonable to believe that the media will continue to cover this cause of action
extensively and that the publicity will prejudice a fair tial.
5. That the addifional statements and media coverage in the news is likely to produce
prejudice in the commlmity making it impossible to have a fair and impartial jury to
ensure that all parties have a fair trial.
6. That an Order in place would ensure that the parties abide by Indiana Rules of
Professional Conduct, Rule 3.6.
That now comes the State of Indiana, by Nicholas C. McLeland, Carroll County
Prosecuting Attorney, and requests the Court to prohibit the parties, counsel, law enforcement
oficials, court personnel, coroner and family members fiom disseminafing information or
releasing any exu'a-judicial statements by means of public communicau'on, unfil further Order of
the Court and for all other just and proper relief in the premises.
Dated this a; N0 day of November, 2022.
W/M
Nféhoms'c: Mcfe1and, Atty. #283ocos
Carroll County Prosecuting Attorney
The lmdersigned certifies flint a copy of the foregoing instrument was served upon the Defendant's
attorney of record, through personally delivery, ordinary mail with proper pomge afixed or by service
through the efiling system and filed with Carroll Cormty Circuit Court, this _22"' day of November,
_
2022.
lcholas C Mc land L
Attorney #283 00-08
) SS:
COUNTY 0F CARROLL )
STATE 0F INDIANA ) CAUSE NUMBER: 08c 1-22 -

00001
) 1
VS. )
) APR 2 0 2023
RICHARD M. ALLEN ) .
7/
?L£ea;144\)
MOTION FOR LEAVE 0F COURT TO SUBPOENA
Comes now the State of Indiana, by Nicholas C. McLeland, Prosecuting Attorney for the
74"" Judicial Circuit, and moves this Court for an Order for Westville Correctional Facility, Atm:
Elise Gallagher, 5501 S. 1100 W., Westville, IN 46391, to produce to the Carroll County
Prosecutor's Ofice, Atm: Nicholas C. McLeland, 101 West Main Street, Delphi, IN 46923, any
and all mental health records for Richard Allen, DOB: 09/09/1972, SSN: 303-82-3934,
associated with his stay as an inmate at that facility, fiom November 3rd, 2022 until present.
While working the Delphi investigation, Carroll County Sherifl's Department Detective
Tony Liggett developed information that Richard Allen was involved in the murders of Victim 1
and Victim 2. The investigation shows the following:
That on February 14", 201 7 Victim 1 and Victim 2 were found deceased in the woods
approximately 0.2 miles northeast of the Morton High Bridge in Carroll Conny. Iheir bodies
were located on the north side of the Deer Creek.
At the tinle, the Manon High Bridge Trail was an approximately 1 mile gravel trail
terminating at the Morton High Bridge. The Monon High Bridge is an abandoned railroad
trestle approximately 0.25 miles long spanning the Deer Creek and Deer Creek valley on the
southeast end of the trail Approximately 0. 7 miles northwest on the trailfrom the
north western edge of the Manon High Bridge is the Freedom Bridge, which is a pedestrian
bridge spanning State Road 25. Approximately 350 feet west of Freedom Bridge was a former
railroad overpass over Old State Road 25 (also known as County Road 300 North). The trail
terminates just west of the former railroad overpass. The majority) of the trail is in a wooded
area with a steep embankment on the south side of the trail. The entirety of the trail and the
location of the girls bodies were and are located in Carroll Conny, Indiana.
Through interviews, reviews of electronic records, and review of video at the Hoosier
Harvestore, investigators believe Victim 1 and Victim 2 were dropped off across from the
Meats Farm at 1:49 p.m. on February 13", 2017 by Kelsi German. The Mears farm is located
on the north side of County Road 300 North near an entrance to the trails. A video from
Victim 2's phone shows that at 2:13 p.m. Victim 1 and Victim 2 encountered a male subject on
the southeast portion of the Manon High Bridge. The male ordered the girls "Guys, Down the
hill". No witnesses saw them after this time. No outgoing communications were found on
Victim 2's phone after this time. Their bodies were discovered on February 14'", 2017.
The video recoveredfrom Victim 2's phone shows Victim 1 walking southeast on the
Manon High Bridge while a male subject wearing a dark jacket andjeans walks behind her.
As the male subject approaches Victim 1 and Victim 2, one of the victims mentions, "gun".
Near the end of the video a male is seen and heard telling the girls, "Guys, Down the hill. "
The girls then begin to proceed down the hill and the video ends. A still photograph taken
from the video and the "Guys, Down the hill" audio was subsequently released to the public to
assist investigators in identifying the male.
Victim 1 and Victim 2 's deaths were ruled as homicides. Clothes werefound in the
Deer Creek belonging to Victim 1 and Victim 2, south of where their bodies were located.
There was also a .40 caliber unspent round less than two feet away from Victim 2's body,
between Victim 1 and Victim 2's bodies. The round was unspent and had atraction marks on
it.
Interviews were conducted with 3 juveniles, R. V., B. W. and A.S.. They advised they
were on the Manon High Bridge Trail on February 13'", 2017. They advised they were
walking on the trail toward Freedom Bridge to go home when they encountered a male
walkingfrom Freedom Bridge toward the Monon High Bridge. A.S. described the male as
"kind of creepy" and advised he was wearing "like blue jeans a like really light blue jacket
and he his hair was gray maybe a little brown and he did not really show his face. " She
advised the jacket was a duck canvas type jacket. R. V. advised she said "Hi" to the male but
he just glared at them. She recalled him being in all black and had something covering his
mouth. She described him as "not very ta " with a bigger build. She said he was not bigger
than 5 '10". R. V. advised he was wearing a black hoodie, black jeans, and black boon. She
stated he had his hands in his pockets.
B. W. showed investigators photographs she took on her phone while she was on the
trail that day. The photographs included a photo of the Manon High Bridge taken at 12:43
p.m., and another one taken at 1:26 p.m. of the bench East of the Freedom Bridge. B. W.
advised after she took the photo of the bench they started walking back toward Freedom
Bridge. She advised that was when they encountered the man who matched the descr7ption of
the photograph taken from Victim 2's video. B. W. described the man she encountered on the
trail as wearing a blue or black windbreaker jacket. She advised the jacket had a collar and
he had his hood up from the clothing underneath his jacket. She advised he was wearing
baggy jeans and was taller than her. She advised her head came up to approximately his
shoulder. She advised R. V. said "Hi" to the man and that he said nothing back. She stated he
was walking with a purpose like he knew where he was going. She stated he had his hands in
his pockem and kept his head down. She advised she did not get a good look at his face but
believed him to be a white male. The girls advised after encountering the male they continued
their walk across Freedom Bridge and the old railroad bridge over Old State Road 25.
Investigators spoke with Beny Blair who advised she was on the trails on February
13", 201 7. Video from the Hoosier Harvestore captured Betsy 's vehicle traveling eastbound at
1:46 p.m. toward the entrance across from the Mears farm Beny advised she saw 4 juvenile
females walking on the bridge over 01d State Road 25 as she was driving underneath on her
way to park. Benjy advised there were no other cars parked across from the Mears farm when
she parked. She advised she walked to the Monon High Bridge and observed a male matching
the one from Victim 2's video. She described the male she saw as a white male, wearing blue
jeans and a blue jean jacket. She advised he was standing on thefirst platform of the Monon
High Bridge, approximately 5 0 feetfrom her. She advised she turned around at the bridge
and continued her walk. She advised approximately halfway between the bridge and the
parking area across from Mears farm, she passed two girls walking toward Monon High
Bridge. She advised she believed the girls were Victim 1 and Victim 2. Video from the
Hoosier Harvestore shows at 1:49 p.m. a white car matching Kelsi German 's vehicle traveling
away from the entrance across from the Mears farm. Betsy advised she finished her walk and
saw no other adults other than the male on the bridge. Her vehicle is seen on Hoosier
Harvestore video at 2:14 p.m. leaving westboundfrom the trails. Bemy advised when she
was leaving she noted a vehicle was parked in an odd manner at the old Child Protective
Services building. She said it was not oddfor vehicles to be parked there but she noticed it
was odd because of the manner it was parked, backed in near the building. Investigators
received a tip from Terry Wilson in which he stated he was on his way to Delphi on State Road
25 around 2:10 p.m. on February 13'", 201 7. He observed a purple PT Cruiser or a small
SUV We vehicle parked on the south side of the old CPS building. He stated it appeared as
though it was backed in as to conceal the license plate of the vehicle. Benjy and Terry both
drew diagrams of where they saw the vehicle parked and their diagrams generally matched as
to the area the vehicle was parked and the manner in which it was parked. Wesley McWhirter
advised he remembered seeing a smaller dark colored car parked at the old CPS building. He
described it as possibly being a "smart" car. McWhirter's vehicle is seen leaving at 2:28 p.m.
on the Hoosier Harvestore video.
Investigators spoke with Sarah Carbaugh, who stated that she was traveling East on
300 North on February 13'", 2022 and observed a male subject walking west, on the North side
of 300 North, away from the Monon High Bridge. Sarah advised that the male subject was
wearing a blue coloredjacket and blue jeans and was muddy and bloody. Shefurther stated,
that it appeared he had gotten into afight. Investigators were able to determine from
watching the video from the Hoosier Harvestore that Sarah Carbaugh was traveling on CR
300 North at approximately 3:5 7 p.m.
Through interviews, electronic data, photographs, and video from the Hoosier Harvestore
investigators determined that there were other people on the trail that day after 2:13 p.m.
Those people were interviewed and none of those individuals encountered the male subject
referenced above, witnessed by the juvenile girls, Bemy Blair and Sarah Carbaugh. Further
none of those individuals witnessed Victim 1 and Victim 2.
Investigators reviewing prior tips encountered a tbp narrative from an omcer who
interviewed Richard M Allen in 201 7. That narrative stated:
Mr. Allen was on the trail between 1330-1530. He parked at the old Farm
Bureau building and walked to the new Freedom Bridge. While at the Freedom
Bridge he saw three females. He noted one was taller and had brown or black
hair. He did not remember descr'ption nor did he speak with them. He walked
from the Freedom Bridge to the High Bridge. He did not see anybody, although
he stated he was watching a stock ticker on his phone as he walked He stated
there were vehicles parked at the High Bridge trail head, however did not pay
attention to them. He did not take any photos or video.
His cellphone did not list an IIlIEI but did have thefollowing:
MED-256 691 463 100 153 495
MEIDHEX-990024 7025797
Potentialfollow up information: Who were the three girls walking in the area
of Freedom Bridge?
Investigators believe Mr. Allen was referring to the former Child Protective Services
building as there was not a Farm Bureau building in the area nor had there been.
Investigators believe thefemales he saw included R. V., B. W. and A.S. due to the time they
were leaving the trail, the time he reported getting to the trail, and the descriptions the three
females gave.
Investigators discovered RichardAllen owned two vehicles in 201 7 a 2016 black Ford
-
Focus and a 2006 gray Ford 500. Investigators observed a vehicle that resembled Allen 's
2016 Ford Focus on the Hoosier Harvestore video at 1 :2 7 p.m traveling westbound on CR 300
North in front of the Hoosier Harvestore, which coincided with his statement that he arrived
around 1:30 p.m. at the trails. Investigators note witnesses described the vehicle parked at the
former Child Protective Services Building as a PT Cruiser, small SUV, or "Smart" car.
Investigators believe those descriptions are similar in nature to a 2016 Ford Focus.
0n October 13", 2022 Richard Allen was interviewed again by investigators. He
advised he was on the trails on February 13", 2017. He stated he saw juvenile girls on the
trails east of Freedom Bridge and that he went onto the Monon High Bridge. Richard Allen
further stated he went out onto the Monon High Bridge to watch the fish. Later in his
statement, he said he walked out to thefirst plafiorm on the bridge. He stated he then walked
back, sat on a bench on the trail and then left. He stated he parked his car on the side of an
old building. He told investigators that he was wearing blue jeans and a blue or black
Carhartt jacket with a hood. He advised he may have been wearing some We of head
covering as well. He further claimed he saw no one else acceptfor the juvenile girls he saw
east of the Freedom Bridge. He told investigators that he owns firearms and they are at his
home.
Richard M Allen 's wife, Kathy Allen, also spoke to investigators. She confirmed that
Richard did have guns and knives at the residence. She also stated that Richard still owns a
blue Carharttjacket.
0n October 13'", 2022, Investigators executed a search warrant ofRichard Allen 's
residence at 196 7 North Whiteman Drive, Delphi, Carroll County, Indiana. Among other
items, officers locatedjackets, boots, knives andfirearms, including a Sig Sauer, Model P226,
.40 caliber pistol with serial number U 625 627.
Between October 14", 2022 and October 19'", 2022 the Indiana State Police Laboratory
performed an analysis on Allen 's Sig Sauer Model P226. The Laboratory peflormed a
physical examination and classification of the firearm, function test, barrel and overall length
measurement, testfiring, ammunition comonent characterization, microscopic conmarison,
and NIBHV. The Laboratory determined the unspent round located within two feet of Victim
2's body had been cycled through Richard M Allen 's Sig Sauer Model P226. Ihe Laboratory
remarked.-
An identification opinion is reached when the evidence ahibin an agreement
of class characteristics and a suflicient agreement of individual marks.
Suflicient agreement is related to the significant duplication of random
striated/impressed marks as evidenced by the correspondence of a pattern or
combination ofpatterns of surface contours. Hie interpretation of identification
is subjective in nature, and based on relevant scientific research and the
reporting examiner's training and experience.
Investigators then ran the firearm andfound that the firearm was purchased by
Richard Allen in 2001. Richard Allen voluntarily came to the Indiana State Police post on
October 26", 2022. He spoke with investigators and stated that he never allowed anyone to
use or borrow the Sig Sauer Model P226 firearnl. When asked about the unspent bullet, he
did not have an mlanation of why the bullet was found between the bodies of Victim 1 and
Victim 2. He again admitted that he was on the trail but denied knowing Victim 1 or Victim 2
and denied any involvement in their murders.
Carroll County Sherifl's Department Detective Tony Liggett has been part of the
investigation since it started in 201 7. He has had an opportunity to review and mmine
evidence gathered in this investigation. Detective Liggett, along with other investigators,
believe the evidence gathered shows that Richard Allen is the male subject seen on the video
from Victim 2's phone who forced the victims down the hill. Further, that the victims were
forced down the hill by Richard Allen and lead to the location where they were murdered
Through the statements and photographs of the juvenile females and the statement of
Beby Blair, R. V., B. W., and A.S. were at the southeast edge of the trail at 12:43 p. m., east of
Freedom Bridge at 1:26 p.m., and walked across the former railroad overpass over Old State
Road 25 after 1:26 p.m. and before 1 :46 p.m. They walked the entirew of the trail and
observed only one person an adult male. Betsy Blair's vehicle is seen on Hoosier Harvestore

video at 1 :46 p.m. and leaving at 2:14 pan. and she stated she only saw one adult male. R. V.,
B. W., A.S., and Beby Blair described the male in similar manners, wearing similar clothing,
leading investigators to believe allfour saw the same male individual.
Investigators believe the male observed by Betsy Blair, R. V., B. W., and A.S. is the same
male depicted in the video from Victim 2's phone due to the descrTptions of the male by the
fourfemales matching the male in the video. Furthermore, Victim 2's video was taken at 2:13
p.m., and Betsy Blair saw only one male while she was on the trailfrom approximately 1:46
p.m. to 2:14 p.m.
Investigators believe Richard Allen was the male seen by Betsy Blair, R. V., B. W., and
A.S. and the male seen in Victim 2's video. Richard Allen told investigators he was on the
trailfrom 1:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. that day. Video from Hoosier Harvestore shows a vehicle
that matches the descrbption ofRichard Allen 's vehicle passing at 1 :27 p.m. toward the former
CPS building. The clothing he told investigators he was wearing match the clothing of the
male in Victim 2's video and the clothing descriptions provided by Beny Blair, R. V., B. W., and
A.S. A vehicle matching the description of his 2016 Ford Focus is seen at or around 2:10
p.m., 2:14 p.m., and 2:28 p.m. at the former CPS building. Through his own admissions,
Richard Allen walked the trails and eventually hiked to the Manon High Bridge and walked
out onto the Manon High Bridge.
A male subject matching Richard Allen 's descr7ption was not seen on the trail after
2:13 p.m. Investigators identified other individuals on the trails or C.R. 300 North between
2:30 p.m. and 4:11 p.m. None of those individuals saw a male subject matching the
descrbmtion of Richard Allen on the trail. Furthermore, Richard Allen stated that he only saw
three girls on the trail, who investigators believe to be R. V., B. W., and A.S.
Investigators believe RichardAllen was not seen on the trail after 2:13 pan. because he
was in the woods with Victim 1 and Victim 2. An unspent .40 caliber round between the
bodies of Victim 1 and Victim 2, was forensically determined to have been cycled through
Richard Allen 's Sig Sauer Model P226. The Sig Sauer Model P226 was found at Richard
Allen's residence and he admitted to owning it. Investigators were able to determine that he
had owned it since 2001. Richard Allen stated he had not been on that property where the
unspent round was found, that he did not know the property owner, and that he had no
mlanation as to why a round cycled through his firearm would be at that location.
Furthermore, he stated that he never allowed anyone to use or borrow the Sig Sauer Model
P226. Investigators believe that after the victims were murdered, Richard Allen returned to
his vehicle by walking down CR 300 North. Investigators believe he was seen by Sarah
Carbaugh walking back to his vehicle on CR 300 north, with clothes that were muddy and
bloody.
Tony Liggett, along with investigators, believe the statentents made by the witnesses
because the statemenb corroborate the timeline of the death the two victims, as well as
coincide with the admissions made by Richard Allen. Further, the accounm relayed by Betsy
Blair, R. V., B. W., and A.S. are similar in nature and time stanms on photographs taken by
B. W. correspond to the times the juvenile females said they were on the trail and saw male
individual.
Investigators believe Richard M Allen committed this kidnapping which resulted in the
killing of Victim 1 and Victim 2. From their prior conclusions investigators believe Richard
M Allen was the male depicted in Victim 2's video saying, "Guys, Down the hill. " They
believe Richard M Allen was carrying his Sig Sauer Model P226 on that day due to the cycled
round matching thatfirearm was located within feet of Victim 2's body. Theyfurther believe
he was carrying the Sig Sauer Model P226from the audio from Victim 2's video in which
investigators believe they hear the sound of a gun being cycled and one of the victims
"
mentioning a "gun. Investigators believe after that time Victim 1 and Victim 2 were removed
from the bridge by Richard to where their murders occurred
Charges werefiled against Richard M Allen on October 28", 2022 for 2 counm of
Murder. Once Richard M Allen was taken into custody, he was moved to the Westville
Correctional Facility, which is part of the Indiana Department of Corrections, for safe
keeping. He has been in saidfacility since November, 2022. When Richard M Allen entered
the facility, he was placed in the segregation unitfor his protection. In the segregation unit,
his cell is equ3pped with a video recorder which records his activities within the cell. There
are also logs indicating when Richard M Allen leaves the cell andfor what purposes. He is
also being seen by medical providers and mental health specialiss to evaluate his physical
condition and monitor his mental health. Richard M Allen also has the ability to use a tablet
in his cell to send text messages, make phone calls and listen to music.
Upon Richard M Allen 's arrival to the facility, he was placed on "suicide watch"
because of certain statements he made about harming himselfi Throughout his stay, his
mental health improved to the point that he was taken off of "suicide watch". He was also
partic5pating in recreation time and beginning to exercise. The facility repom that he was
doing well and that they had no issues or concerns. His day to day demeanor was that he was
quiet, read a lot of books, did crossword puzzles and mrcised daily.
'
0n April 3", 2023, Richard M Allen made a phone call to his wife Kathy Allen. In
that phone call, Richard M Allen admin several times that he killed Abby and Libby.
Investigators had the phone call transcribed and the transcription confirms that Richard M
Allen admits that he committed the murders ofAbigail Williams and Liberty German. He
admits several times within the phone call that he committed the oflenses as charged. His
wife, Kathy Allen, ends the phone call abruptly.
Soon afler, attorneys for Richard M Allen filed an Emergency Motion to Modifi'
Safekeeping Order. In that motion, the Defense states that Richard M Allen 's mental state
has declined because Westville Correctional Facility is unfit and that he should be moved.
Defense also makes allegations that his mental health has declined to the point where Richard
M Allen has been deprived of his constitutional right to assist in his defense of this case.
Further, Defense alleges that his mental capacity has declined because of his incarceration at
Westville Correctional Facility. Defense has also challenged that his treatment is
unconstitutional. Soon after, investigators were made aware by the Warden of Westville
Correctional Facility that Richard M Allen began to act strangely.
Richard M Allen was wetting down paperwork he had gotten from his attorneys and
eating it, he was refusing to eat and refusing to sleep. He would go days on end refusing to
sleep. He further, broke the tablet that he usedfor text messages and phone calls. He went
from making up to 2 phone calls a day as ofApril 3", 2023 to not making any phone calls at
all. To date, Richard M Allen still has not made a phone call since April 3", 2023.
0n April 14", 2023, Richard M Allen was evaluated by two psychiatrilsm and one
psychologist to discuss his turn in behavior and whether or not there was a needfor
involuntary medication. The panel would also discuss moving Richard M Allen to a diflerent
facility that has a psychiatric unit. From that meeting, it was determined that Richard M
Allen did not need involuntary medication and that he did not need to be moved to another
faciligi. Since that meeting, Richard M Allen has began to eat again and has begun to sleep.
He behavior has began to return to what it was prior to making the admission on April 3",
2023.
Investigators believe the information that Westville Correctional Facility has gathered
since Richard M Allen was placed in thatfacility is inmortant to the investigation.
Investigators believe that there is video evidence that will include his admissions, plus his
behavior prior to the admission and directly after. Investigators also believe logs kept of his
daily routines are inwortant to determine when he was in his cell and when he was removed
and the reasons he was removed. Further, any records ofphysical exams and/or mental
mms will be inmortant to determine the state of his mental and physical health. This
information is needed to refute the allegations made in Defense's Emergency Motion to
Modifiz Safekeeping Order. The evidence is also necessary to refute the allegations of
diminished mental capacity and/or other possible defenses. It may also be inportant as the
State introduces additional evidence gathered, including admissions made by Richard M
Allen himself Investigators believe all the information is important in the continued
investigation for Murder ofAbigail Williams and Liberty German.
For these reasons, the State is requesting the employment records for Richard Allen as
specified in the attached Subpoena Duces Tecum and/or Request for Production of Documents
and Records to a Non-Party: (I-I.I.)

This request is made for the purpose of an investigation regarding Murder. Further in
response to the observations made by the investigating oficer, the State believes that Richard
Allen is a suspect in the criminal acts. The State believes that the employment records would be
able to confirm or support information that the law enforcement has acquired as a result of the
murder investigation.
The State of Indiana has contacted Defense counsel for Richard Allen and Defense
counsel has not informed me whether they consent or object to this subpoenas. The State of
Indiana has also sent them a courtesy copy of this subpoena, via email.
WHEREFORE, the State of Indiana, by Nicholas C. McLeland, Prosecuting Attorney for

the 74th Judicial Circuit, respectquy prays that this Court review the attached Subpoena and then
order production of said records, and such other relief as is just and proper in the premises.
MM MM
101 West Main Street
Delphi, IN 46923
765-564-4514
I hereby certify that service ofa true md complete copy ofme above and foregoing pleading or met was made upon flie
following parties and filed wim the Carroll Circuit Court by depositing the same in the United sates mail in an
envelope properly addressed and wim suficient postage afixed this a0 T" day of April, 2023.
Westville Correctional Facility

Indiana Department of Correcfions
Atm: Elise Gallagher
5501 S. 1100 W.
Westvi]1e,1N46391
M: C MM
Carroll County Prosecutor
283 00-08
STATE OF INDIANA ) IN THE CARROLL CIRCIJIT COURT
) ss:
COUNTY 0F CARROLL )
STATE 0F INDIANA ) CAUSE NUMBER: os

) ~22éo-14R-oogl
"an
vs. )
) APR 2 0 2023
RICHARD M. ALLEN ) .
%W?;77/3W
MOTION FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO SUBPOENA THIRD-PARTWRWVCU'T COURT
74m Judicial Circuit, and moves this Court for an Order for Westville Correcfional Facility, Atm:
Elise Gallagher, 5501 S. 1100 W., Westville, IN 46391, to produce to the Carroll County
Prosecutor's Ofice, Attn: Nicholas C. McLeland, 101 West Main Street, Delphi, IN 46923, any
and all medical records for Richard Allen, DOB: 09/09/1972, SSN: 303-82-3934, associated with
his stay as an inmate at that facility, fi'om November 3'", 2022 unfil present.
While working the Delphi investigation, Carroll County Sherifl's Department Detective
Tony Liggett developed information that Richard Allen was involved in the murders of Victim 1
171a! onFebruary 14", 2017 Victim 1 and Victim 2 were found deceased in the woods
approximatel}: 0.2 miles northeast of the Manon High Bridge in Carroll Couno'. Their bodies
At the time, the Manon High Bridge Trail was an approximatebv 1 mile gravel trail
terminating at the Monon High Bridge. The Monon High Bridge is an abandoned railroad
southeast end of the trail Approximately 0. 7 miles northwest on the trailfrom the
northwestern edge of the Monon High Bridge is the Freedom Bridge, which is a pedestrian
railroad overpass over Old State Road 25 (also known as County Road 300 North). The trail
terminates just west of the former railroad overpass. The majority of the trail is in a wooded
location of the girls bodies were and are located in Carroll County, Indiana.
Harvestore, investigators believe Victim 1 and Victim 2 were dropped ofl across from the
Mears Farm at 1:49 p.m. on February 13'", 201 7 by Kelsi German The Mears farm is located
on the north side of Count}, Road 300 North near an entrance to the trails. A video from
the southeast portion of the Manon High Bridge. The male ordered the girls "Guys, Down the
hill". No witnesses saw them after this time. No outgoing communications werefound on
Victim 2's phone after this time. Iheir bodies were discovered on February 14", 201 7.
Hie video recoveredfrom Victim 2's phone shows Victim 1 walking southeast on the
Ihe girls then begin to proceed down the hill and the video ends. A still photograph taken
assist investigators in identifiring the male.
Victim 1 and Victim 2's deaths were ruled as homicides. Clothes werefound in the
Deer Creek belonging to Victim 1 and Victim 2, south of where their bodies were located
There was also a .40 caliber unspent round less than two feet awayfrom Victim 2's body,
between Victim 1 and Victim 2's bodies. The round was unspent and had atraction marks on
it.
were on the Manon High Bridge Trail on February 13", 2017. They advised they were
walkingfrom Freedom Bridge toward the Manon High Bridge. A.S. described the male as
mouth. She described him as "not very tall" with a bigger build She said he was not bigger
than 5 '10". R. V. advised he was wearing a black hoodie, black jeans, and black boom. She
stated he had his hands in his pockeb'.
trail that day. The photographs included a photo of the Monon High Bridge taken at 12:43
Bridge. She advised that was when they encountered the man who matched the descrbtion of
his pockets and kept his head down. She advised she did not get a good look at his face but
Investigators spoke with Bemy Blair who advised she was on the trails on February
1:46 pan. toward the entrance across from the Mearsfam Bemy advised she saw 4 juvenile
females walking on the bridge over Old State Road 25 as she was driving underneath on her
way to park. Bemy advised there were no other cars parked across from the Mears farm when
she parked. She advised she walked to the Monon High Bridge and observed a male matching
jeans and a blue jean jacket. She advised he was standing on thefirst platform of the Manon
High Bridge, approximately 50feetfrom her. She advised she turned around at the bridge
parking area across from Mearsfarm, she passed two girls walking toward Monon High
away from the entrance across from the Mears farm. Ben'y advised she finished her walk and
saw no other adults other than the male on the bridge. Her vehicle is seen on Hoosier
Harvestore video at 2:14 p.m. leaving westboundfrom the trails. Betsy advised when she
received a tip from Terry Wilson in which he stated he was on his way to Debhi on State Road
25 around 2:10 p.m. on February 13", 2017. He observed a purple PT Cruiser or a small
SUV type vehicle parked on the south side of the old CPS building. He stated it appeared as
though it was backed in as to conceal the license plate of the vehicle. Betsy and Terry both
to the area the vehicle was parked and the manner in which it was parked Wesley McWhirter
described it as possibly! being a "smart" car. McWhirter's vehicle is seen leaving at 2:28 p.m.
300 North on February 13", 2022 and observed a male subject walking west, on the North side
of 300 North, away from the Manon High Bridge. Sarah advised that the male subject was
that it appeared he had gotten into a fight. Investigators were able to determine from
300 North at approximately, 3:5 7 p.m.
Ihrough interviews, electronic data, photographs, and video from the Hoosier Harvestore
referenced above, witnessed by the juvenile girls, Bemy Blair and Sarah Carbaugh. Further
Investigators reviewing prior @s encountered a tbp narrative from an oflicer who
hair. He did not remember description nor did he speak with them. He walked
he stated he was watching a stock ticker on his phone as he walked. He stated
His cellphone did not list an MEI but did have thefollowing:
MED-256 691 463 100 153 495
MEIDHEX-990024 7025797
of Freedom Bridge?
Investigators believe the females he saw included R. V., B. W. and A.S. due to the time they
were leaving the trail, the time he reported getting to the trail, and the descr7ptions the three
females gave.
Investigators discovered Richard Allen owned two vehicles in 201 7 a 2016 black Ford

Focus and a 2006 gray Ford 500. Investigators observed a vehicle that resembledAllen 's
2016 Ford Focus on the Hoosier Harvestore video at 1:2 7p.m traveling westbound on CR 300
Investigators believe those descrbptions are similar in nature to a 2016 Ford Focus.
advised he was on the trails on February 13", 201 7. He stated he saw juvenile girls on the
further stated he went out onto the Monon High Bridge to watch the fish. Later in his
statement, he said he walked out to the first pWom on the bridge. He stated he then walked
Carharttjacket with a hood. He advised he may have been wearing some type of head
covering as well. He further claimed he saw no one else exceptfor the juvenile girls he saw
east of the Freedom Bridge. He told investigators that he owns firearm and they are at his
home.
Richard M Allen 's wife, Kathy Allen, also spoke to investigators. She confirmed that
0n October 13'", 2022, Investigators executed a search warrant ofRichardAllen 's
residence at 196 7 North Whiteman Drive, Delphi, Carroll County, Indiana. Among other
items, oflicers located jackets, boom, knives andfirearms, including a Sig Sauer, Model P226,
Between October 14", 2022 and October 19", 2022 the Indiana State Police Laboratory
performed an analysis on Allen 's Sig Sauer Model P226. The Laboratory performed a
physical mmination and classification of the firearm, function test, barrel and overall length
measurement, testfiring, ammunition comonent characterization, microscopic comarison,
and NIBHV. Ihe Laboratory determined the unspent round located within two feet of Victim
2's body had been cycled through Richard M Allen 's Sig Sauer Model P226. The Laboratory
remarked:
An identification opinion is reached when the evidence ahibim an agreement
striated/inmressed marks as evidenced by the correspondence of a pattern or
combination ofpatterns of surface contours. The interpretation of identification
is subjective in nature, and based on relevant scientific research and the
reporting mminer's training and werience.
Investigators then ran the firearm andfound that the firearm was purchased by
October 26'", 2022. He spoke with investigators and stated that he never allowed anyone to
use or borrow the Sig Sauer Model P226 firearm When asked about the unspent bullet, he
did not have an mlanation of why the bullet was found between the bodies of Victim 1 and
investigation since it started in 2017. He has had an opportunity, to review and mmine
evidence gathered in this investigation. Detective Liggett, along with other investigators,
from Victim 2 's phone who forced the victims down the hill. Further, that the victims were
forced down the hill by RichardAllen and lead to the location where they were murdered
Through the statements and photographs of the juvenile females and the statement of
Bemy Blair, R. V., B. W., and A.S. were at the southeast edge of the trail at 12:43 p.m., east of
Road 25 after 1:26 p.m. and before 1:46 p.m. They walked the entirety of the trail and

video at 1:46 p.m. and leaving at 2:14 p.m. and she stated she onb saw one adult male. R. V.,
B. W., A.S., and Bemy Blair described the male in similar manners, wearing similar clothing,
Investigators believe the male observed by Beby Blair, R. V., B. W., and A.S. is the same
male depicted in the video from Victim 2's phone due to the descrbptions of the male by the
p.m., and Beny Blair saw only one male while she was on the trailfrom approximately 1:46
p.m. to 2:14 p.m.
Investigators believe Richard Allen was the male seen by Beby Blair, R. V., B. W., and
that matches the descrbytion ofRichard Allen 's vehicle passing at 1:2 7p.m. toward the former
male in Victim 2's video and the clothing descrbptions provided by Betsy Blair, R. V., B. W., and
p.m., 2:14 p.m., and 2:28 p.m. at the former CPS building. Through his own admissions,
out onto the Monon High Bridge.
A male subject matching Richard Allen 's descrbption was not seen on the trail after
2:13 p.m. Investigators identified other individuals on the trails or C.R. 300 North between
descrbption ofRichard Allen on the trail. Furthermore, Richard Allen stated that he only saw
Investigators believe Richard Allen was not seen on the trail after 2:13 pan. because he
P226. Investigators believe that after the victints were murdered, Richard Allen returned to
'
bloody.
Tony Liggett, along with investigators, believe the statement made by the witnesses
because the statemenm corroborate the timeline of the death the two victims, as well as
coincide with the admissions made by Richard Allen. Further, the accounm relayed by Beby
Blair, R. V., B. W., and A.S. are similar in nature and time storms on photographs taken by
individual.
M Allen was the male depicted in Victim 2's video saying, "Guys, Down the hill. " Ihey
round matching thatfirearm was located within feet of Victim 2 's body. They further believe
he was carrying the Sig Sauer Model P226 from the audio from Victim 2's video in which
"
mentioning a "gun. Investigators believe after that time Victim I and Victim 2 were removed
Charges were filed against Richard M Allen on October 28", 2022for 2 counm of
his cell is equbpped with a video recorder which records his activities within the cell. There
also being seen by medical providers and mental health specialism to evaluate his physical
Upon Richard M Allen 's arrival to the facility, he was placed on "suicide watch"
because of certain statements he made about harming himself.' Ihroughout his stay, his
mental health inproved to the point that he was taken off of "suicide watch". He was also
particbpating in recreation time and beginning to exercise. The facility repom that he was
quiet, read a lot of books, did crossword puzzles and exercised daily.
that phone call, Richard M Allen admits several times that he killed Abby and Libby.
Investigators had the phone call transcribed and the transcrTption confirms that Richard M
Allen admin that he committed the murders ofAbigail William and Liberty German. He
admin several times within the phone call that he committed the oflenses as charged. His
wife, Kathy Allen, ends the phone call abruptly.
Soon after, attorneys for Richard M Allen filed an Emergency Motion to Modifi'
has declined because Westville Correctional Facility is unfit and that he should be moved.
Westville Correctional Facility. Defense has also challenged that his treaunent is
sleep. He further, broke the tablet that he usedfor tat messages and phone calls. He went
0n April 14", 2023, Richard M Allen was evaluated by two psychiatrism and one
involuntary medication. The panel would also discuss moving Richard M Allen to a diflerent
facility'. Since that meeting, Richard M Allen has began to eat again and has begun to sleep.
2023.
since Richard M Allen was placed in thatfacility is inportant to the investigation.
daily routines are important to determine when he was in his cell and when he was removed
and the reasons he was removed. Further, any records ofphysical aams and/or mental
mms will be inmortant to determine the state of his mental and physical health. This
Modifi' Safekeeping Order. The evidence is also necessary to refute the allegations of
diminished mental capacigz and/or other possible defenses. It may also be inmortant as the
Allen himself: Investigators believe all the information is irnportant in the continued
investigation for Murder ofAbigail Williams and Liberty German.
For these reasons, the State is requesfing the employment records for Richard Allen as
and Records to a Non-Party: (H.I.)

response to the observations made by the investigating oficer, the State believes that Richard
WI-IEREFORE, the State of Indiana, by Nicholas C. McLeland, Prosecuting Attorney for
the 74th Judicial Circuit, respectfully prays that this Court review the attached Subpoena and then
order producfion of said records, and such other relief as is just and proper in the premises.
Respectfiilly submitted,
MM "W
Delphi, IN 46923
765-564-45 14
I hereby certiiy mm service of a true and complem copy of the above mid foregoing pleading or met was made upon me
following parties and filed wim the Carroll Circuit Court by depositing the same in the United sates mail in an
envelope properly addressed and wim suficient postage afixed this g QT" day of April, 2023.
Westville Correcfional Facility

Indiana Department of Corrections
Attn: Elise Gallagher
5501 S. 1100 W.
Westviue,m46391
All: C MM
28300-08
)ss:
COUNTY 0F CARROLL )
'
STATE 0F INDIANA ) CAUSE NUMB C 0
1,.
) gl-Zilo-
in," Z. A.
vs. )
) APR 2 0 2023
RICHARD M. ALLEN ) _
fluwgmm
MOTION FOR LEAVE OF COURT To SUBPOENA THIRBEWW REESRTWOURT
Comes now the State of Indiana, by Nicholas C. McLeland, Prosecufing Attorney for the
74m Judicial Circuit, and moves this Court for an Order for CVS Headquarters, Atm: Records
Department, One CVS Drive, Woonsocket, RI 02895, to produce to the Carroll County
Prosecutor's Ofice, Atm: Nicholas C. McLeland, 101 West Main Street, Delphi, IN 46923, any
and all employment records for Richard Allen, DOB: 09/09/1972, SSN: 303-82-3934, for his
employment with your company.
While working the Delphi invesfigau'on, Carroll County Sherifi's Department Detective
Tony Liggett developed information that Richard Allen was involved in the murders of Victim l
Hat on February 14", 2017 Victim 1 and Victim 2 were found deceased in the woods
approximately 0.2 miles northeast of the Manon High Bridge in Carroll County. Their bodies
At the time, the Monon High Bridge Trail was an approximately 1 mile gravel trail
terminating at the Monon High Bridge. Ihe Manon High Bridge is an abandoned railroad
southeast end of the trail. Approximately 0. 7 miles northwest on the trailfrom the
northwestern edge of the Morton High Bridge is the Freedom Bridge, which is a pedestrian
railroad overpass over Old State Road 25 (also known as County Road 300 North). Ihe trail
Harvestore, investigators believe Victim 1 and Victim 2 were dropped ofl' across from the
Mears Farm at 1:49 p.m. on February 13'", 201 7 by Kelsi German Hie Mears farm is located
Victim 2's phone shows that at 2:13 pan. Victim 1 and Victim 2 encountered a male subject on
the southeast portion of the Monon High Bridge. The male ordered the girls "Guys, Down the
hill". No witnesses saw them after this time. No outgoing communications werefound on
Victim 2 's phone afler this time. Iheir bodies were discovered on February 14", 201 7.
The girls then begin to proceed down the hill and the video ends. A still photograph taken
assist investigators in identifying the male.
Victim 1 and Victim 2's deaths were ruled as homicides. Clothes were found in the
There was also a .40 caliber unspent round less than two feet awayfrom Victim 2 's body,
between Victim 1 and Victim 2's bodies. The round was unspent and had wracfion marks on
it.
were on the Monon High Bridge Trail on February 13", 2017. They advised they were
walkingfrom Freedom Bridge toward the Manon High Bridge. A.S. described the male as
mouth. She described him as "not very tall" with a bigger build. She said he was not bigger
than 5 '10". R. V. advised he was wearing a black hoodie, black jeans, and black boom. She
trail that day. The photographs included a photo of the Monon High Bridge taken at 12:43
Bridge. She advised that was when they encountered the man who matched the descr7ption of
baggy jeans and was taller than her. She advised her head came up to approximately, his
his pockets and kept his head down. She advised she did not get a good look at his face but
Investigators spoke with Beny Blair who advised she was on the trails on February
1:46 p.m. toward the entrance across from the Mears farm. Benjy advised she saw 4 juvenile
females walking on the bridge over Old State Road 25 as she was driving underneath on her
way to park. Betsy advised there were no other cars parked across from the Mears farm when
she parked. She advised she walked to the Manon High Bridge and observed a male matching
jeans and a blue jean jacket. She advised he was standing on the first platform of the Monon
High Bridge, approximately 50 feetfrom her. She advised she turned around at the bridge
parking area across from Meats farm, she passed two girls walking toward Manon High
away from the entrance across from the Mearsfarm. Betsy advised she finished her walk and
saw no other adulm other than the male on the bridge. Her vehicle is seen on Hoosier
Harvestore video at 2:14 p.m. leaving westboundfrom the trails. Bemy advised when she
received a tip from Terry Wilson in which he stated he was on his way to Debbi on State Road
25 around 2:10pm; on February 13", 201 7. He observed a purple PT Cruiser or a small
SUV {we vehicle parked on the south side of the old CPS building. He stated it appeared as
though it was backed in as to conceal the license plate of the vehicle. Beby and Terry both
to the area the vehicle was parked and the manner in which it was parked Wesley McWhirter
of 300 North, away from the Monon High Bridge. Sarah advised that the male subject was
that it appeared he had gotten into a fight Investigators were able to determine from
referenced above, witnessed by the juvenile girls, Betsy Blair and Sarah Carbaugh. Further
Investigators reviewing prior tbs encountered a tbp narrative from an oflicer who
interviewed Richard M Allen in 201 7. Ihat narrative stated:
hair. He did not remember descflption nor did he speak with them. He walked
His cellphone did not list an MEI but did have thefollowing:
MED-256 691 463 100 153 495
MEIDHEX-990024 7025 79 7
of Freedom Bridge?
were leaving the trail, the time he reported getting to the trail, and the descrFptions the three
females gave.
Investigators discovered Richard Allen owned two vehicles in 201 7 a 2016 black Ford

Focus and a 2006 gray Ford 500. Investigators observed a vehicle that resembledAllen 's
Investigators believe those descrbytions are similar in nature to a 2016 Ford Focus.
0n October 13'", 2022 Richard Allen was interviewed again by investigators. He
advised he was on the trails on February 13", 2017. He stated he saw juvenile girls on the
further stated he went out onto the Monon High Bridge to watch the fish. Later in his
statement, he said he walked out to the first platform on the bridge. He stated he then walked
Carharttjacket with a hood. He advised he may have been wearing some type of head
covering as well. He further claimed he saw no one else exceptfor the juvenile girls he saw
east of the Freedom Bridge. He told investigators that he owns firearms and they are at his
home.
Richard M Allen 's wife, Kathy Allen, also spoke to investigators. She confirmed that
0n October 13", 2022, Investigators aecuted a search warrant of Richard Allen 's
residence at 1967 North Whiteman Drive, Debbi, Carroll Coungi, Indiana. Among other
items, omcers locatedjackets, boots, knives andfirearms, including a Sig Sauer, Model P226,
physical examination and classification of the firearm, function test, barrel and overall length
measurement, testfiring, ammunition cowonent characterization, microscopic cowarison,
and NIBHV. Hie Laboratory determined the unspent round located within two feet of Victim
remarked:
An identification opinion is reached when the evidence ahibim an agreement
striated/impressed marks as evidenced by the correspondence of a pattern or
combination ofpatterns of surface contours. flue interpretation of identification
is subjective in nature, and based on relevant scientific research and the
reporting examiner 's training and merience.
Investigators then ran the firearm andfound that the firearm was purchased by
use or borrow the Sig Sauer Model P226 firearm When asked about the unspent bullet, he
did not have an emanation of why the bullet was found between the bodies of Victim 1 and
investigation since it started in 2017. He has had an opportunity! to review and mmine
evidence gathered in this investigation. Detective Liggeu, along with other investigators,
from Victim 2's phone who forced the victims down the hill. Further, that the victims were
forced down the hill by Richard Allen and lead to the location where they were murdered.
Through the statemenm and photographs of the juvenilefemales and the statement of
Bem'y Blair, R. V., B. W., and A.S. were at the southeast edge of the trail at 12:43 p.m., east of
Road 25 after 1:26 p.m. and before 1:46 p.m. They walked the entirety of the trail and
-
video at 1:46 p.m. and leaving at 2:14 p.m. and she stated she only saw one adult male. R. V.,
B. W., A.S., and Beb'y Blair described the male in similar manners, wearing similar clothing,
Investigators believe the male observed by Beny Blair, R. V., B. W., and A.S. is the same
male dqicted in the video from Victim 2's phone due to the descrbtions of the male by the
p.m., and Beny Blair saw only one male while she was on the trailfrom approximately 1:46
p.m. to 2:14 p.m.
A.S. and the male seen in Victim 2's video. RichardAllen told investigators he was on the
that matches the descr5ption ofRichard Allen 's vehicle passing at 1:2 7p.m. toward theformer
male in Victim 2's video and the clothing descriptions provided by Benjy Blair, R. V., B. W., and
p.m., 2:14 p.m., and 2:28 p.m. at the former CPS building. Ihrough his own admissions,
Richard Allen walked the trails and eventually hiked to the Monon High Bridge and walked
out onto the Manon High Bridge.
A male subject matching Richard Allen 's descr7ption was not seen on the trail afler
descrption of Richard Allen on the trail. Furthermore, Richard Allen stated that he only saw
Investigators believe Richard Allen was not seen on the trail after 2:13 pJn. because he
Allen 's residence and he admitted to owning it. Investigators were able to determine that he
bloody.
Tony Liggett, along with investigators, believe the statemenm made by the witnesses
coincide with the admissions made by Richard Allen. Further, the accounfl relayed by Beby
Blair, R. V., B. W., and A.S. are similar in nature and time stanms on photographs taken by
individual.
Investigators believe Richard M Allen committed this kidnapping which resulted it: the
killing of Victim I and Victim 2. From their prior conclusions investigators believe Richard
round matching thatfirearm was located within feet of Victim 2's body. They further believe
he was carrying the Sig Sauer Model P226 from the audio from Victim 2 's video in which
"
Additional information gatheredfrom the Defendant shows that at the time of the
arrest, the Defendant was employed at the CVS in Delphi, Indiana. Investigators spoke to
representatives from CVS who stated that they are in possession of Richard Allen 's work
records. Investigators believe the work records would help determine when he was at work at
the CVS located in Delphi and when he was not. Investigators believe from talking to
representatives from CVS that RichardAllen 's personalfiles from CVS have information that
is irrportant to investigators. Investigators believe Richard Allen 's work records and personal
files from CVS will have evidence that is inportant to this investigation.
response to the observafions made by the investigating oficer, the State believes that Richard
counsel consents/obj ects to this subpoena. Further Defense counsel waives the 15 days and
agrees that this subpoena can be granted immediately.
WI-IEREFORE, the State of Indiana, by Nicholas C. McLeland, Prosecuting Attorney for
the 74m Judicial Circuit, respectfully prays that this Court review the attached Subpoena and then
fl/cc "W
Delphi, m 46923
765-564-45 14
I hereby certify flint service of a uue and complete copy of the above and foregoing pleading or paper was made upon the
following parties and filed with the Carroll Circuit Court by deposifing the same in the United Sm mail in an
envelope properly adfiessed and wit suficient posmge afixed this 2c [TI' day of April, 2023.
CVS Headquarters
Atm: Records Department
One CVS Drive
Woodsocket, RI 02895
Ml: C MM
28300-08
STATE OF INDIANA ) IN THE CARROLL CRCUIT COURT
) ss:
COUNTY 0F CARROLL )
STATE 0F INDIANA CAUSE
)))))
0U
_;
VS.
NLMBFOfiOl-izlo-fib
APR 20 2023
RICHARD M. ALLEN Claudia)"

CLERK CARROLL'czRcuaT COURT
MOTION FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO SUBPOENA THIRD-PARTY RECORDS
74'" Judicial Circuit, and moves this Court for an Order for Westville Correctional Facility, Atm:
Elise Gallagher, 5501 S. 1100 W., Westville, IN 46391, to produce to the Carroll county
Prosecutor's Ofice, Atm: Nicholas C. McLeland, 101 West Main Street, Delphi, m 46923, any
and all records for Richard Allen, DOB: 09/09/1972, SSN: 303-82-3934, associated with his stay
as an inmate at that facility.
While worhng the Delphi investigation, Carroll County Sherifi's Department Detective
Tony Liggett developed information that Richard Allen was involved in the murders of Vicfim 1
and Vicfim 2. The investigation shows the following:
Hat on February 14", 2017 Victim 1 and Victim 2 werefound deceased in the woods
approximatel)' 0.2 miles northeast of the Manon High Bridge in Carroll Conny. Their bodies
At the time, the Manon High Bridge Trail was an approximately 1 mile gravel trail
terminatirtg at the Morton High Bridge. The Manon High Bridge is an abandoned railroad
southeast end of the trail. Approximately 0. 7 miles northwest on the trailfrom the
northwestern edge of the Manon High Bridge is the Freedom Bridge, which is a pedesm'an
railroad overpass over Old State Road 25 (also known as Conny Road 300 North). Ihe trail
area with a steep embankment on the south side of the trail Ihe entirety of the trail and the
Harvestore, investigators believe Victim 1 and Victim 2 were dropped 01f across from the
Meats Farm at 1:49 p.01. on February 13", 2017 by Kelsi German. Hie Mears farm is located
the southeast portion of the Monon High Bridge. The male ordered the girls "Guys, Down the
hill". No witnesses saw them afler this time. No outgoing communications werefound on
Victim 2's phone after this time. Their bodies were discovered on February 14", 201 7.
Ihe girls then begin to proceed down the hill and the video ends. A still photograph taken
assist investigators in identlfling the male.
Victim 1 and Victim 2's deaths were ruled as homicida. Clotha werefound in the
Ihere was also a .40 caliber unspent round less than two feet awayfrom Victim 2's body,
between Victim 1 and Victim 2's bodies. The round was unspent and had wraction marks on
it.
Interviews were conducted with 3 juveniles, R. V., B. W. and A.S.. Ihey advised they
were on the Monon High Bridge Trail on February 13", 2017. They advised they were
walkingfrom Freedom Bridge toward the Monon High Bridge. A.S. described the male as
mouth. She described him as "not very tall" with a bigger build. She said he was not bigger
than 5'10". R. V. advised he was wearing a black hoodie, black jeans, and black boom. She
trail that day. Hie photographs included a photo of the Morton High Bridge taken at 12:43
advised afler she took the photo of the bench they started walking back toward Freedom
Bridge. She advised that was when they encountered the man who matched the descfiption of
was walking with a purpose like he knew where he was going. She stated he had his hands irr
his pockem and kept his head down. She advised she did not get a good look at his face but
believed him to be a white male. Ihe girls advised after encountering the male they continued
Investigators spoke with Beby Blair who advised she was on the trails on February
13'", 201 7. Video from the Hoosier Harvestore captured Betsy 's vehicle traveling eastbound at
1:46 p.m. toward the entrance across from the Mears farm. Betsy advised she saw 4 juvenile
females walking an the bridge over Old State Road 25 as she was driving underneath on her
way to park. Beby advised there were no other cars parked across from the Mears farm when
she parked She advised she walked to the Manon High Bridge and observed a male matching
jeans and a blue jean jacket. She advised he was standing on the first pWom of the Manon
High Bridge, approximately 50 feetfrom her. She advised she turned around at the bridge
parking area across from Mears farm, she passed two girls walking toward Manon High
away from the entrance across from the Mears farm. Beb'y advised she finished her walk and
saw no other adulm other than the male on the bridge. Her vehicle is seen on Hoosier
Harvestore video at 2:14 p.m. leaving westboundfrom the trails. Beby advised when she
received a tip from Terry Wilson in which he stated he was on his way to Delphi on State Road
25 around 2:10 p.m. on February 13", 201 7. He observed a purple PT Cruiser or a small
SUV ope vehicle parked on the south side of the old CPS building. He stated it appeared as
though it was backed in as to conceal the license plate of the vehicle. Betsy and Terry both
drew diagrants of where they saw the vehicle parked and their diagrams generally matched as
to the area the vehicle was parked and the manner in which it was parked. Wesley McWhirter
of 300 North, away from the Manon High Bridge. Sarah advised that the male subject was
that it appeared he had gotten into a fight. Investigators were able to determine from
referenced above, witnessed by the juvenile girls, Beuy Blair and Sarah Carbaugh. Further
Investigators reviewing prior figs encountered a tip narrativefrom an oflicer who
Bridge he saw threefemales. He noted one was taller and had brown or black
hair. He did not remember descrytion nor did he speak with them. He walked
His cellphone did not list an IMEI but did have the following:
MED-256 691 463 100 153 495
LIEDHEX-990024 7025797
of Freedom Bridge?
Investigators believe Mr. Allen was referring to theformer Child Protective Servicw
were leaving the trail, the time he reported getting to the trail, and the descrbptions the three
females gave.
Investigators discovered Richard Allen owned two vehicles in 2017 a 2016 black Ford
-
Focus and a 2006 gray Ford 500. Investigators observed a vehicle that resembled Allen 's
around 1:30 p.m. at the trails. Investigators note witness" described the vehicle parked at the
Investigators believe those descflptions are similar in nature to a 2016 Ford Focus.
advised he was on the trails on February 13'", 201 7. He stated he saw juvenile girls on the
further stated he went out onto the Monon High Bridge to watch the fish. Later in his
statement, he said he walked out to the first platform on the bridge. He stated he then walked
Carharttjacket with a hood. He advised he may have been wearing some ape of head
covering as well He further claimed he saw no one else acceptfor the juvenile girls he saw
east of the Freedom Bridge. He told investigators that he owns firearm and they are at his
home.
Richard M Allen 's wife, Kathy Allen, also spoke to investigators. She confirmed that
0n October 13", 2022, Investigators mcuted a search warrant ofRichardAllen 's
residence at 1 96 7 North Whiteman Drive, Delphi, Carroll County, Indiana. Among other
item, oflicers located jackets, boom, knives andfirearms, including a Sig Sauer, Model P226,
physical examination and classification of the firearm, function test, barrel and overall length
measurement, testfiring, ammunition cowonent characterization, microscopic cowarison,
and NIBflV. The Laboratory determined the unspent round located within two feet of Victim
remarked:
An identification opinion is reached when the evidence ahibim an agreement
striated/inmressed marks as evidenced by the correspondence of a pattern or
combination ofpatterns of surface contours. The interpretation of identification
is subjective in nature, and based on relevant scientific research and the
reporting examiner's training and experience
Investigators then ran the firearm andfound that thefirearm was purchased by
use or borrow the Sig Sauer Model P226 firearm. When asked about the unspent bullet, he
did not have an amlanation of why the bullet was found between the bodies of Victim 1 and
investigation since it started in 201 7. He has had an opportunigi to review and mmine
evidence gathered in this investigation Detective Liggett, along with other investigators,
from Victim 2's phone who forced the victims down the hilL Further, that the victims were
forced down the hill by Richard Allen and lead to the location where they were murdered
Ihrough the statements and photographs of the juvenile females and the statement of
Remy Blair, R. V., B. W., and A.S. were at the southeast edge of the trail at 12:43 p.m., east of
Road 25 after I :26 p.m. and before 1:46 p.m. They walked the entirety of the trail and
observed only one person an adult male. Beby Blair's vehicle is seen on Hoosier Harvestore

video at 1:46 p.m. and leaving at 2:14 p.m. and she stated she onb saw one adult male. R. V.,
B. W., A.S., and Beby Blair described the male in similar manners, wearing similar clothing,
Investigators believe the male observed by Bemy Blair, R. V., B. W2, and A.S. is the same
male depicted in the video from Victim 2's phone due to the descrmtions of the male by the
p.m., and Beby Blair saw only one male while she was on the trailfrom approximately 1:46
p.m. to 2:14p.m.
that matches the descrbption ofRichard Allen 's vehicle passing at 1 :27 p.m. toward the former
male in Victim 2's video and the clothing descr5ptions provided by Beby Blair, R. V., B. W., and
p.m., 2:14 p.m., and 2:28 p.ni. at the former CPS building. Through his own admissions,
out onto the Monon High Bridge.
A male subject matching Richard Allen 's descrbmtion was not seen on the trail after
descrbtion ofRichardAllen on the trail Furthermore, Richard Allen stated that he only saw
Investigators believe Richard Allen was not seen on the trail after 2:13 pan. because he
mlanation as to why a round cycled through his firearm would be at that location.
bloody.
Tony Liggett, along with investigators, believe the statemenm made by the witnesses
coincide with the admissions made by Richard Allen. Further, the accouns relayed by Beny
Blair, R. V., B. W., and A.S. are similar in nature and time storms on photographs taken by
B. W. correspond to the times the juvenilefemales said they were on the trail and saw male
individual.
believe Richard M. Allen was carrying his Sig Sauer Model P226 on that day due to the cycled
round matching thatfirearm was located within feet of Victim 2's body. They further believe
he was carrying the Sig Sauer Model P226from the audio from Victim 2's video in which
"
Charges were filed against Richard M Allen on October 28", 2022 for 2 counts of
his cell is equ5pped with a video recorder which records his activities within the celL There
also being seen by medical providers and mental health specialisu to evaluate his physical
Upon Richard M Allen 's arrival to the facility}, he was placed on "suicide watch
"
because of certain statements he made about harming himself; Throughout his stay, his
mental health inmroved to the point that he was taken ofl' of "suicide watch". He was also
particbating in recreation time and beginning to mrcise. Ihefacility repom that he was
quiet, read a lot of books, did crossword puzzles and exercised daily.
that phone call, Richard M Allen admits several times that he killed Abby and Libby.
Investigators had the phone call transcribed and the transcflption confirms that Richard M.
Allen admin that he committed the murders ofAbigail Williams and Libero! German. He
admin several times within the phone call that he committed the oflenses as charged His
wife, Kathy Allen, ends the phone call abruptljr.
Soon after, attorneys for Richard M Allen filed an Emergency Motion to Modifiv
has declined because Westville Correctional Facility is unfit and that he should be moved
Westville Correctional Facility. Defense has also challenged that his treatment is
sleep. He further, broke the tablet that he usedfor tat messages and phone calls. He went
0n April 14", 2023, Richard M Allen was evaluated by two psychiatrism and one
involuntary medication. Ihe panel would also discuss moving Richard M Allen to a difl'erent
facilio'. Since that meeting, Richard M Allen has began to eat again and has begun to sleep.
2023.
since Richard M Allen was placed in thatfacility is inportant to the investigation.
daily routines are important to determine when he was in his cell and when he was removed
and the reasons he was removed. Further, any records ofphysical mms and/or mental
mm will be inmortant to determine the state of his mental and physical health. This
Modifi Safekeeping Order. Ihe evidence is also necessary to refute the allegations of
diminished mental capacity and/or other possible defenses. It may also be inmortant as the
Allen himself Investigators believe all the information is important in the continued
investigation for Murder ofAbigail Williams and Liberg' German.

response to the observations made by the investigating oficcr, the State believes that Richard
WHEREFORE, the State of Indiana, by Nicholas C. McLeland, Prosecuting Attorney for

the 74th Judicial Circuit, respectfufly prays that this Court review the attached Subpoena and then
Maww
Delphi, IN 46923
765-564-45 14
Iherebycertifyfliatservice ofatmeandcompletecopyofflie above andforegoingpleadingorpaperwasmadetmonme

following parties and filed wifli the Carroll Circuit Court by depositing the same in the Uniwd States mail in an
envelope properly addressed and wim suficient poshge afixed this Q 0m day of April, 2023.
Westville Correcfional Facility

Indiana Depamnent of Corrections
5501 S. 1100 W.
WestviHe,1N46391
AA": ( MM
Carroll Comty Prosecutor
28300-08
Filed: 6/19/2023 9:48 PM

) SS:
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN, )
)
Defendant. )
MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA OR ENTER PROTECTIVE ORDER
The Indiana Department of Correction, a non-party, by counsel, respectfully
requests the Court to quash the subpoena commanding DOC to permit attorneys
Bradley A. Rozzi, Andrew J. Baldwin, and their agent to enter Westville
Correctional Facility for the purpose of inspecting, measuring, surveying, and
photographing the facility. Quashing the subpoena is appropriate because
permitting the broad access requested would introduce significant security risks at
the facility, rendering the request unreasonable and oppressive under the
circumstances.
If the Court should deny DOC’s motion to quash the subpoena in its entirety,
DOC would respectfully request a protective order strictly limiting the inspection to
the specific cells and cellblock(s) where Mr. Allen has been housed and prohibiting
access to the rest of Westville Correctional Facility.
BACKGROUND
1. Defendant Richard M. Allen is charged in this cause with Count 1:
murder, a felony; Count 2: murder, a felony.

1
2. The probable cause affidavit does not allege any factual connection to
Westville Correctional Facility.
3. Following a request by the Carroll County Sheriff, the Honorable
Benjamin A. Diener ordered Mr. Allen transferred to a suitable facility within the
Department of Correction.
4. Mr. Allen is currently housed at Westville Correctional Facility.
5. Westville Correctional Facility is situated on 411 acres of land—85
acres of which are enclosed by fence. The facility has a capacity of over 3,000
inmates and employs approximately 750 people. Westville Correctional Facility:
Facts and Figures — 2020, Indiana Department of Correction,
https://www.in.gov/idoc/files/WCC-Facts-and-Figures-Brochure.pdf.
Request to Inspect Westville Correctional Facility
6. On May 19, 2023, counsel for Mr. Allen issued to DOC a subpoena and
request for production demanding to enter Westville Correctional Facility “for the
purpose of inspecting, measuring, surveying, and photographing the individual cell
block(s), and surrounding facility” where Mr. Allen has been housed since
November 2022. A true and accurate copy of the subpoena and request for
production are attached as Exhibit A.
7. DOC objects to Mr. Allen’s request for inspection—in particular the
request to inspect the “surrounding facility”—because permitting such an inspection
would introduce unacceptable security risks at the facility and unduly burden DOC
staff to accommodate such a request.
2
LEGAL STANDARD
8. A court may quash a subpoena that is unreasonable and oppressive.
See Criminal Rule 2; Trial Rule 45(B)(1); Newton v. Yates, 170 Ind.App. 486, 353
N.E.2d 485, 500 (1976).
Scope of Discovery
9. A party may serve upon a non-party a request “to permit entry upon
designated land or other property in the possession or control of” the non-party “for
the purpose of inspection and measuring, surveying, photographing, testing, or
sampling the property or any designated object or operation thereon.” T.R. 34(A)
(applicable to non-parties through Trial Rule 34(C)(1)). But that request must fall
within the scope of Trial Rule 26(B).
10. Trial Rule 26(B)(1) limits discovery to matters “relevant to the subject-
matter involved in the pending action” including the claims and defenses of the
parties and “the existence, description, nature, custody, condition and location of
any books, documents, or other tangible things and the identity and location of
persons having knowledge of any discoverable matter.”
Unreasonable and Oppressive Request for Inspection
11. Here, the request that Mr. Allen’s attorneys be permitted to inspect,
survey, measure and photograph Westville Correctional Facility—not just the
cellblocks, but the “surrounding facility”—is not “reasonably calculated to lead to
the discovery of admissible evidence.” T.R. 26(B)(1). In particular, such an
inspection does not reasonably relate any cognizable claim or defense. The probable
cause affidavit does not allege that there is any connection whatsoever between the
3
murder charges and Westville Correctional Facility. Such an inspection would shed
no light on “the existence, description, nature, custody, condition and location of any
books, documents, or other tangible things” related to the charges or, other than Mr.
Allen himself, “the identity and location of persons having knowledge of any
discoverable matter.” T.R. 26(B)(1).
12. This request poses a strong security risk as it could compromise facility
security should Defendant’s counsel be permitted to inspect, survey, measure and
photograph the cell blocks and the surrounding facility.
13. Because Mr. Allen’s request for inspection is beyond the scope of
appropriate discovery and imposes significant safety risks to the DOC, the
subpoena should be quashed.
Alternative Relief: Protective Order
14. If the Court should deny DOC’s motion to quash the subpoena, it
should enter a protective order to strictly limit the inspection to the cells and
cellblocks where Mr. Allen has been housed.
15. Trial Rule 26(B) permits the Court to limit discovery when “the burden
or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit.”
16. Trial Rule 26(C) permits the court to protect against oppression, undue
burden and expense by requiring that discovery be conducted “on specified terms
and conditions.”
17. Here, the risk to DOC, its employees, and the offenders in its custody
greatly outweighs any benefit to Mr. Allen of allowing an inspection of the
4
“surrounding facility” encompassing Mr. Allen’s cellblock. Accordingly, a protective
order would be warranted.
18. DOC would propose a protective order that establishes that any fruits
of the inspection be limited to this case, and that any inspection be limited to Mr.
Allen’s cell and cellblock and related recreational area, bathing facility, therapy
room, and public visitation area.
WHEREFORE, non-party Department of Correction respectfully requests the
Court to quash the subpoena commanding it to permit the inspection demanded by
Mr. Allen, or alternatively, for a protective order reasonably limiting the areas for
inspection.
THEODORE E. ROKITA
Attorney General of Indiana
By: /s/Aaron M. Ridlen

Aaron M. Ridlen
By: /s/Hannah M. Deters

Hannah M. Deters

Indiana Government Center South, 5th Floor
Telephone: (317) 232-2826
5
I certify that on June 19, 2023, the foregoing document was served upon the
following person(s) via IEFS, if Registered Users, or by depositing the foregoing
document in the U.S. Mail, first class, postage prepaid, if exempt or non-registered
user.
Bradley Anthony Rozzi Nicholas C. McLeland

200 Fourth St. Carroll County Prosecutor
Logansport, IN 46947 101 W. Main Street
Attorney for Defendant Delphi, IN 46923
Andrew Joseph Baldwin

150 N Main Street
Franklin, IN 46131
/s/ Aaron M. Ridlen

Aaron M. Ridlen

Telephone: (317) 232-2826
Facsimile: (317) 232-7979
6
Filed: 11/21/2022 3:22 PM

)SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL) CAUSE NO.08C01-2210-MR-000001
)
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
v. )
)
RICHARD M ALLEN )
PETITION TO LET TO BAIL

Comes now the Accused, by counsel, and (pursuant to Article 1 Section 17
of the Constitution of the State of Indiana, Indiana Code § 35-33-8-2 and Fry v
State, 990 N.E.2d 429 (Ind. 2013)) respectfully moves this Court to conduct a
hearing and then release the Accused on his own recognizance, or in the
alternative to set a reasonable bail. In support of his petition the Accused avers
the following:
1. That the Accused, Richard Allen, was arrested and charged with
murder, on or about October 28, 2022.
2. That the defense has received and reviewed the probable cause affidavit
that, as of the time of the filing of this motion, has been sealed.
3. That because neither the proof of guilt is evident, nor the presumption
of guilt strong, the Accused is seeking a hearing to release the Accused
on his own recognizance or in the alternative to set a reasonable bail.
WHEREFORE, the Accused, by counsel, respectfully prays that the
Court release the Accused on his own recognizance or in the alternative to
set a reasonable bail.

/s/ Andrew Baldwin

Counsel for Accused
150 N. Main St.
317-736-0053
/s/ Andrew Baldwin

) SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL )
STATE OF INDIANA ) CAUSE NUMBER: 08C01-2210-MR-00001

)
vs.
RICHARD M. ALLEN
)
)
)
F I '
JUN I 3
5'
w»
2.023
" V
STATE'S OBJECTION To DEFENDANT'S MOTION F0 no n- .{fl p
DISCLOSURE OF DEFENDANT'S MENTAL HEALTH RECORDS
respectfully objects to the Defendant's Motion for Order on Continuing Disclosure of
Defendant's Mental Health Records and in support of said motion states the following:
l. That on June 7'", 2023, the Defendant filed a Motion for Order on Continuing Disclosure
of Defendant's Mental Health Records asking this Court for an Order to the Indiana
Department of Corrections, and the Carroll County Sherifl's Department to release
Richard Allen's mental health records.
2. That the State filed a Motion for Leave of the Court to file a 3'" Party Subpoena for
Richard Allen's mental health records on April 20th, 2023.
3. That the Defense filed a Motion to Quash the subpoena filed by the State, stating that the
subpoena violated the Defendant's privacy rights and that the records requested are
irrelevant as there are no pending matters pertaining to the Defendant's competency to
stand trial, nor has the defense of insanity been raised.
4. That the State believes these records are relevant due to the allegations of lack of
competency made in the Defendant's Emergency Motion to Modify Safekeeping Order;
l
Defendant's Motion to Reconsider and Request for Due Process Hearing; along with
various letters and emails fiom the Defense stating that the Defendant's mental stability
and competency are in question since his stay at the Indiana Department of Corrections.
5. That the Defense even calls into question the Defendant's competency in their Motion for
Order on Continuing Disclosure of Defendant's Mental Health Records.
6. That the subpoenas filed by the State only requested the mental health records for the
Defendant for the time that he has been incarcerated in the Department of Corrections.
7. In their various court communications, the Defense has implied that although Richard
Allen was competent at the onset of this case, since he has been incarcerated, he has
become incompetent.
8. That the Defendant has admitted that he committed the ofi'enses that he is charged with
no less than 5 times while talking to his wife and his mother on the public jail phones
available at the Indiana Department of Corrections.
9. That the State believes that these admissions are going to be challenged by the Defense
because of a lack of competency of the Defendant.
10. 'Ihat the State is concerned about the ability to respond to the motions filed by the
Defense without knowing if the Defendant is competent or not.

11. That the State would have no objection to this motion if the records are presented to the
State as well.
WHEREFORE, the State objects to the Defendant's Motion for Order on Continuing
Disclosure of Defendant's Mental Health Records and would ask the Court to deny the same.
Respectquy submitted.
2
fl/CCMM
Attorney #28300-08
The lmdersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing instrument was served upon his attorney of record,
through personally delivery, ordinary mail with proper postage afiixed or by service through the efiling system and
filed with Carroll County Circuit Court, this _l3"'_ day of June, 2023.
MM MM
Nicholas c. McLeland
V
Attorney #28300-08
3
STATE OF INDIANA ) IN TI-E CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT
) ss:
COUNTY 0F CARROLL )
STATE 0F INDIANA ) CAUSE NUMBER: MR 00001

)
VS
RICHARD M. ALLEN
)
)
F 08EC01--2210
JUN 132023
C1 7?
'T COURT
STATE'S OBJECTION T0 DEFENDANT'S MOTIOCNEwml'IW
respectfully objects to the Defendant's Motion to Suppress and would ask the Court to deny the
same and in support of said motion states the following:
1. That on May 19th, 2023, the Defendant filed a Motion to Suppress the evidence seized as
a result of search warrant executed on the home of the Defendant on October 13th, 2022.
2 That the Defense alleges that the search warrant was unreasonable under the Indiana and
Federal Constitution in that it lacked probable cause, that it failed to establish that the
items to be seized were in the residence or could be expected to be in the residence; that
the afiidavit failed to provide particular information that particular items related to the
particular crime would be found in the home; and that the amdavit failed to connect
generic items to actual items that were possibly used in the crime.
3 That in September 2022, while reviewing the evidence in the investigation into the
murders of Abigail Williams and Liberty German, investigators discovered an interview
that was done with Richard Allen in 2017 by Indiana Conservation Officer Dan Dulin.
4 That in the 2017 interview, Richard Allen admitted being on the trail the day that Abigail
Williams and Liberty German went missing.
1
. That he stated that he was on the trail between 1:30 P.M. and 3:30 P.M. and that while he
was on the trail he was using his phone.
6. That on October 13th, 2022, investigators invited Richard Allen and his wife, Kathy
Allen, to speak to them and follow up on that interview done in 2017.
7. That both Richard Allen and Kathy Allen came to the interview on their own on October
13'", 2022, were not under arrest and were fiee to leave the interview at any time.
. That investigators learned fi'om those interviews that Richard Allen reaffirmed that he
was in fact on the trails the day that Abigail Williams and Liberty German went missing
and further admitted to being on the high bridge.
9. That he also told investigators that he was wearing blue jeans, and a blue or black
Carhartt jacket with a hood and that he was wearing a head covering.
10. That, further, Richard stated that he did own guns and that the guns were in his home.
11. That investigators learned fi'om Kathy that Richard Allen still had guns and knives in the
home, along with a blue Carhartt jacket.
12. That Investigators believed a firearm was involved in the abduction and murder of
Abigail Williams and Liberty German because an unspent .40 caliber round was found
between the bodies of Abigail Williams and Liberty German.
l3. That Investigators believed a knife was used in the murder of Abigail Williams and
Liberty German.
14. That the clothes that Richard Allen described wearing the day he was on the trails match
the description of the man seen on the bridge fiom the video taken by Liberty German's
phone.
2
15. That it was also gathered that Richard Allen still possessed the firearms, knives and the
clothing and said items were in his house.
l6. That based on this information, investigators prepared a probable cause affidavit with a
search warrant for the home of Richard Allen.
17. That the probable cause affidavit covers all the information that law enforcement had
gathered in the investigation up until October 13m, 2022.
18. That Investigators applied for the search warrant on October 13th, 2022 and the same was
granted that day by Carroll County Circuit Court Judge Benjamin Diener, herein attached
as State's Exhibit "1".
19. Investigators went to the residence of the Defendant, located at 1967 North Whiteman
Drive, Delphi, Indiana, knocked on the door and executed the search warrant around 5:00
P.M. on October 13m, 2022 and the search was complete around 7:09 P.M.
20. The Defendant and his wife were asked to be out of the residence while the search
warrant was executed but were allowed back in the residence immediately afierwards.
21. Investigators found several items in the residence, including firearms and electronic
devices, all of which is outlined in the Search Warrant Return attached herein as State's
Exhibit "2".
22. That for a search warrant to be valid, it must be accompanied by an afidavit that
establishes probable cause, which is a sufficient basis of fact that exists to permit a
reasonably prudent person to believe that a search of the premises will uncover evidence
of a crime. Esquerdo v. State, 640 N.E.2d 1029.
23. 'Ihat Indiana Code Indiana Code 35-33-5-2 specifies the minimum information necessary
to establish probable cause, which is as follows:
3
a. Information particularly describing the house or place to be searched and the
things to be searched for;
b. Information alleging substantially the offense in relation thereto and that the
afiant believes and has good cause to believe that the things sought are concealed
in that place that they are attempting to search; or the person to be arrested
committed the ofi'ense described; and
c. Information setting forth the facts known to the amant through personal
knowledge or based on hearsay constituting probable cause.
24. That under the 4th Amendment of the United States Constitution, the evidence needed to
obtain a search warrant need not rise to the statute of facts necessary to obtain a
conviction, the circumstances alleged in the afiidavit need only lead a person of
reasonable caution to believe that a crime has been committed. Chambers v. State, 540
N.E.2d 600 (Ind. 1989).
25. That when the sufficiency of the search warrant is challenged under the Fourth
Amendment by the Defendant, as it is in the Defendant's motion, the role of the
reviewing court is to simply ensure that there was a substantial basis for finding probable
cause, reminding itself that it owes great deference to the initial probable cause
determination; and will not invalidate a warrant by interpreting probable cause affidavits
in a hypertechnical, rather than a commonsense manner. Watkins v. State, 85 N.E.3d 597
(Ind. 201 7).
26. That under Article 1, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution, the reasonableness of the
search is determined by using the Litchfield test which looks at the totality of the
circumstances and requires consideration of both the degree of intrusion into the subjects
4
ordinary activities and the basis upon which the officer selected the subject of the search
or seizure. Litchfield v. State, 824 N.E.2d 356.
27. That the inquiry requires a balancing of the degree of concern, suspicion or knowledge
that a violation has occurred; the degree of intrusion the method of the search or seizure
imposes on the citizens ordinary activities and the extent of law enforcement needs.
Litchfield v. State, 824 N.E.2d 356.
28. That the State believes that the afiidavit does meet the threshold to establish probable
cause under the 4th Amendment of the United States Constitution in that there was a
substantial basis for finding probable cause and there was a high likelihood based on the
evidence that investigators had that there was evidence of the crime in the home of
Richard Allen.
29. That the State believes that the afiidavit accompanied with the search warrant for the
home of Richard Allen does establish probable cause under Article 1, Section 11 of the
Indiana Constitution and does pass the Litchfield test for reasonableness under the totality
of the circumstances.
30. That the State believes that the afiidavit establishes the items to be seized were in the
residence by statements made by Richard Allen and his wife, Kathy Allen.
31. That the State believes that the affidavit provides particular information that particular
items related to a particular crime will be found in the home based on the statements
made by Richard Allen and his wife, Kathy Allen.
32. That the State believes that the amdavit connects generic items to actual items that were
possibly used in the crime based on the investigators evidence that they gathered
throughout the investigation.
5
33. That the evidence that was gathered in 2017 was reafl'lrmed by the interview done with
Richard Allen and his wife, Kathy Allen on October 13th, 2022.
34. Investigators believed, at that time, that they had enough probable cause to apply for a
search warrant. Investigators also believed that if they did not execute a search warrant
on the residence immediately, that there was a danger that the Defendant would destroy
crucial evidence in the investigafion. The investigators believed through their training
and experience believed that there was a real chance that the Defendant would destroy
evidence once he knew he was a suspect in the crime.
WHEREFORE, the State has shown that the actions by the oflicers were valid and
justified and did not violate the Defendant's 4'" Amendment under the United States constitution
or Article 1, Section ll of the Indiana Constitution and therefore the Motion to Suppress should
be denied. Respectfully submitted.
Mafiw
Attorney #28300-08
The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing instrument was served upon his attorney of record,
through personally delivery, ordinary mail with proper postage affixed or by service through the efiling system and
filed with Carroll County Circuit Court, this _l3"'_ day of June, 2023.
MM "W
Attorney #28300-08Prosecuting Attorney
6
STATE 0F INDIANA ) CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT
)
COUNTY 0F CARROLL )
) CAUSE NUMBER: 08001-2210-MC- 8L1

)
SEARCH WARRANT
To: Law Enforcement

Search of the residence located at 1967 North Whiteman Drive, Delphi, Indiana in
Carroll
RE:
County
You are hereby authorized and ordered in the name of the State of Indiana with the necessary and
the residence, outbuildings, including
proper assistance to enter into or upon the property, including
a wooden shed on the property, and a 2016 Black Ford Focus SE vehicle located at 1967 North
Whiteman Drive, Delphi, Indiana in Carroll County, said property being the residence of Richard M.
Allen. The residence located on the property is described as a ranch style house that is brick with
a
a wooden
two-car garage, as further depicted in the attached photograph. The property also contains
shed. There is also a 2016 Black Ford Focus SE located on the property. Law enforcement
is
of the crime of Murder in
ordered to diligently search for any and all information and/or evidence
blue
violation of I.C. 3542-1-1; specifically to search for handguns, .40 caliber ammunition, knives,
sweatshirts/jackets, black sweatshirts/jackets, clothing,
electronic devices and a cell phone with
and any other electronic devices located in or
phone number 317-612-4533; any other cell phones;
on the locations described above. Law enforcement is authorized to search these areas to determine
the residence, in
whether or not there has been a violation committed as described in the afiidavit at
the yard, the vehicle and any appurtenances.
You are furthermore ordered to seize such property, or any part thereof, formd on such search and
the same, or any part thereof forthwith before me to be disposed of according to
law.
thatyou bring
Please return this information within 10 days.
Dated this l3"? day of October, 2022.

(Mam.
I
Benjamin Dimer udge
STATE'S
§.-
2
jHIBIT
i
COUNTY OF CARROLL
) CAUSE NUMBER: 08C01-2210MC- 8'4

)
AFFIDAVIT FOR SEARCH WARRANT

afiirms that he
Carroll County Sheriffs Department Detective Tony Liggett, swears or
believes and has good cause to believe that evidence relating to the crime
of Murder in violation of
located at 1967
1C 35-42-1-1 is located at the residence of Richard M. Allen, DOB: 09/09/1972,
believes that evidence
North Whiteman Drive, Delphi, Indiana in Carroll County. Detective Liggett
black
in the form of handguns, .40 caliber ammunition, knives, blue sweatshirt/jackets,
number 317-612-4533
sweatshirts/jackets,clothing, electronic devices and a cell phone with phone
and any other cell phones used by Richard M. Allen will be located
on the property. The afiant
states as follows in support of said warrant:
That on Monday, February 13'", 2017 at approximately 1:50 p.m., Abigail Williams
and
at the Monon High Bridge trail ofi' of
Liberty German were dropped ofi' by a family member
2017 at approximately 12:17 p.m. the
County Road 300 North. 0n Tuesday, February 14'",
located in the Woods Northeast of the Manon High
girls were found deceased, their bodies were
as homicides and their wounds were caused
Bridge. Autopsies of the girls ruled their deaths
German's iPhone 6S under her body at the
by a sharp object. Investigators located Liberty
scene and were able to recover a video, approximately 43 seconds
in length, captured at 2:13
video depicts Abigail walking on the Monon High Bridge
p.m. on February 13'", 2017. The
walks behind her. Near
toward Liberty while a male subject wearing a dark jacket and jeans
the "Down the hill." Through
the end of the video the man is heard in the video telling girls,
located a .40 caliber
further investigation of the location of the bodies, investigators also
unspent round. They also determined that articles of clothing from the girls were missing
a sock.
from the scene, including a pair of underwear and
interviews done with 3 of the 4 girls that were on
Through the investigation there were
on February 13'", 2017 that matched
the trials that day. The girls observed a male on the trails
the description the male in the video recorded by Liberty
German. The 3 girls, identified as
encountered this male near a bench east of
Railly Voorhies, Breanna Wilber, and Anna Spath,
towards the Freedom
the Freedom Bridge. The girls were on the trail and were walking
encountered was walking from the Freedom Bridge towards
Bridge to go home. The male they
the Monon High Bridge. One of the 3 girls, identified as
Anna Spath, described the male as an
described him as "kinda creepy".
older man walking on the trails as they were leaving and she
the man as wearing "like blue jeans a
In a text from Anna to Kyla Brummett, Anne described
like really light bluejacket he his hair was gray maybe a little brown and he did not really
show his face". Investigator Steve Mullin and Brent Ingram interviewed
Anna and she
The jacket was a
described the male as wearing a blue jacket and light blue (faded) blue jeans.
and she said that
canvass duck type jacket. Railly Voorbees, was also in the group of 4 girls
in all black and
she said "Hi" to the man but he just glared at them. She recalled him being
someone was in a
had something covering his mouth. Railly recalled telling her sister that
grumpy mood. She went on to describe him as
"not very tall" and bigger build. She said that
he was wearing a
he was not bigger than 5'10". Rainy went on to say in an interview that
in his pockets.
black hoodie, black jeans, and black boots. She said that he had his hands
able to show investigators
An interview was conducted in 2020 of Bre Wilber. She was
a picture that she took on her phone of the Monon High Bridge with
a time stamp of 12:43 PM
Freedom
EST. Bre showed investigators another picture she took at the bench just east of the
PM EST. Bre stated after she took the
Bridge when they when they were leaving at 1:26 that's
back towards the Freedom Bridge. Bre stated
picture at the bench, they started walking in the picture.
when they walked past the man who matched the description of the individual
law enforcement
Detective Liggett believes the picture that she is referring to is the picture
on her cell phone on
released of the man on the bridge taken from the video Liberty captured
the day of the murders. Bre described the man as wearing a blue or black
Windbreaker jacket.
She stated the jacket had a collar and he had his hood up from the clothing underneath the
and was taller than her. She stated her head
jacket. Bre advised he was wearing baggy jeans
came up to approximately his shoulder. Bre told us Railly said hi to
the man and he said
with a purpose like he knew where he was
nothing back. Bre described the man as walking
hands in his pockets and kept his head down. She
going. Bre also stated the man had his
didn't get a good look at his face but believed he was a white male.
old SR25.
As the girls left they crossed the Freedom Bridge and the railroad bridge over
her walk.
An individual by the name of Betsy Blair, was returning to the trails to finish Betsy
Harvestore on 300 North traveling east bound to the trailhead
Blair is seen on video at Hoosier
went under the
to park at 13:46:20 actual time. Blair saw the girls walking above as she
narrative from
railroad bridge. On September 21, 2022, Detective Liggett was provided a tip
The narrative
ORION DIN-C000074-01 to review. It was from DNR Lieutenant Dan Dulin.
was as follows:
Mr. Allen was on the trail between 1330-1530. He parked at the old Farm Bureau
While at the Freedom Bridge he saw
building and walked to the new Freedom Bridge.
three females. He noted one was taller and had brown or black hair. He did not
the Freedom Bridge to
remember descrhytion nor did he speak with them. He walked from
a stock ticker
the High Bridge. He did not see anybody, although stated he was watching
on his phone as he walked. He stated there were vehicle parked
at the High Bridge trail
head, however did not pay attention to them.
He did not take any photos or video. His cell
phone did not list an IMEI
but did have the following:
MEID256 691 463 100 I53 495

MEIDHEX-990024 7025797
the three girls walking in the area of Freedom
Potentialfollow up information: Who were
Bridge?
he admits that on February 13'", 2017, he parked his
Through the statement of Mr. Allen,
1330-1530hrs and was on the trails at that
vehicle at the "old Farm Bureau building" from
time. There is no "old Farm Bureau building" anywhere close to the
trails or bridges.
Detective Liggett believes he is referring to the old Child Protective Services building. In
a 2006 grey Ford 500. Upon review
2017, Richard Allen owned a 2016 black Ford Focus and
were able
of video collected from the Hoosier Harvestore on February 13", 2017, investigators
to locate a vehicle that appears to match Allen's 2016 Ford Focus on
the video at 1327hrs
1330hrs.
actual time. This coincides with Allen saying he was at the trails around
As
Detective Liggett then examined the timeline for the day of the homicides.
Breanna Wilher, and Anna Spath were leaving the
previously said above, Railly Voorhies, taken
trails and passed by a male matching the description of the male in the video by Liberty.
of the video from the Hoosier Harvestore
Given the statements by Allen and the timestamp
and the statements from the 3 of the 4 girls, Detective Liggett behaves
that the male the 3 of the
girls saw was in fact Richard Allen.
Allen stated that after he passed the girls and then he walked to the Monon High Bridge
and saw nobody else. Investigators believe that after passing the Hoosier
Harvestore at
In her
l346hrs Blair parked at the trailhead entrance across from the Mears residence.
time. She walked to
interview she says there are no other cars at the trailhead entrance at that
video. She described
the Monon High Bridge and a male matching the male from Liberty's
the "blue duck
him as a white male wearing blue jeans and a blue jean jacket. This matches
on the first
canvass" jacket Anna Spath describes. Blair said that the male was standing
5oft away from her. Blair turned around
platform of the Monon High Bridge approximately
the bridge and the
at the bridge and continued her walk. Approximately halfway between
main hub of trails she passed two girls walking towards the High Bridge.
Blair said that she
Hoosier Harvestore
believed it was Liberty German and Abigail Williams. At l349hrs, on the
and Abigail would
video there is a white car that matches Kelsie German's vehicle. Liberty
have been dropped ofl right before this video. Blair finished her walk
and is seen on the
Blair said that she saw no adults
Hoosier Harvestore video leaving westbound at 1414hrs.
other than the male on the bridge.
the old Child
As Blair was leaving she noted a vehicle was parked in an odd manner at
Protection Service building. She said that it was not odd for vehicles to be parked there, but it
often use the south edge
was odd that it was backed in near the building. She said that vehicles
Detective Liggett
of the parking lot so they are closer to the trail to get to the Freedom Bridge.
reviewed a tip (DIN-C001751) from Terry Wilson. Wilson was on his way Delphi on
to
at l410hrs. He
February 13'", 2017 on the Hoosier Heartland Highway approximately
vehicle parked on the
observed what he described as purple PT Cruiser or a small SUV type
it was backed in as to conceal the license
south side of the old CPS building. Wilson said that
interviews both Blair and Wilson drew a diagram and had
plate of the vehicle. During their
the vehicle they saw parked in the same general area and manner.
An interview was done of Sarah Carbaugh in 2017. She states that she was traveling
North side of 300 North,
East on 300 North and observed a male subject walking west, on the
that he was wearing blue colored jacket and blue jeans
away Monon High Bridge. She stated
he had gotten into a fight.
and was muddy and bloody. She further stated, that it appeared
video that she was on 300 North at 1557hrs.
Investigators determined from the
Richard M. Allen was interviewed by investigators on October 13'", 2022 at
Detective Liggett and Carroll County Prosecutor
investigation center. He was interviewed by
to come to the center and speak with investigators. He
Investigator Steven Mullin. He agreed
was advised his rights and he was further advised
that he was not under arrest and was free to
the center if he so desired.
leave at any time. Investigator Mullin explained to him how to leave
He stated that he was in fact on the trails on February 13'", 2017. He
further stated that he
he went on to the Monon
saw 3 girls on the trails East of the Freedom Bridge and also that
was wearing blue jeans and a blue or black
High Bridge. He also told investigators that he of head covering.
Carhartt jacket with a hood on that day. He stated he also wore some type
observ ed East of the Freedom
He further claimed that he saw no one else but the 3 girls that he
told investigators that he also had guns at this
Bridge. Further, prior to the interview, he
home.
confirmed
Richard M. Allen's wife, Kathy Allen, spoke to investigators as well. She
that Richard still has a
that Richard did have guns and knives at the residence. She also stated
blue Carhartt jacket.
The evidence gathered shows that on February 13'", 2017 that 4 girls, Railly Voorhies,
Breanna Wilber, Anna Spath, and Isabel Voorhies, were on the
trail when they observed a
The male was wearing
male individual walking on the trails towards the Monon High Bridge.
clothes similar to the clothes of the male depicted in the video
taken from Liberty German's
male is the last known individual to have contact with
phone. Investigators know that this
were murdered. Further, Betsy Blair, was
Liberty German and Abigail Williams before they
and she says that is the same
shown a picture of the individual on the Manon High Bridge
interview with Richard M.
individual that she witnessed on the trails and on the bridge. In an
that he was in fact on the trails on February 13",
Allen, done on October 13'", 2022, he admits He stated that
2017 and walked past the 3 girls and continued on to the Manon High Bridge.
ual there are several other
he was physically on the bridge. After Betsy Blair sees this individ
n or Abigail Williams.
individuals on the trail that don't observe the man or Liberty Germa
with a blue jacket and jeans
Sarah Carbaugh, then observes a man walking down 300 North,
She is shown a picture of the
and that he is muddy and bloody, as if he had just been in a fight.
on 300 North.
man on the bridge and she that is the same man she observed walking
M. Allen is the last individ ual to have contact with
Investigators believe that Richard
further believe that Richard M. Allen is
Liberty German and Abigail Williams. Investigators taken from Liberty
the individual depicted on the Monon High Bridge from the video
Germans' phone.
21 years. In his role as a

Detective Liggett has been a member of law enforcement for
murders. He has also been
Deputy and as Detective, he has investigated numerous crimes, including
r. He has also participated in training
trained in how to investigate offenses, such as Murde
In many of those cases, evidence of the crime is
specifically geared towards murder investigations.
s n evidence in relation to the ofi'ense,
on the individuals cell phone. That evidence include locatio
or after the offense, and evidence in fmtherance of the crime or
in an
pictures or videos taken during
efl'ort to hide their participation in the crime. Detect
ive Liggett has had an opportunity to review the
knows fiom his taining and experience
evidence collected in this investigation. Detective Liggett
that when individuals commit oflenses, evidence

of those ofi'enses in the form or pictures or location
data is captured on that individuals cell phone.

Detective Liggett also knows that individuals tend to
download their phones to other electronic devices, or use their cell phones
in conjunction with other
the information
electronic devices, including Ipads and computers. Detective Liggett believes
and admissions by Richard M. Allen is reliable. Richaxd
gathered from witnesses, video evidence
He further admits
M. Allen places himself at the trails and specifically on the Monon High Bridge.
that he is wearing jeans and a dark Carhartt jacket. These clothes match the
clothes by the individual
on the bridge in the photo taken from the video fiom Liberty German's phone.
Detective Liggett
near the time that
was also able to corroborate the information that Richard M. Allen was at the trails
individual on the bridge was captured by
Liberty German and Abigail Williams. The picture of the
to her and Abigail
investigators fiom the video taken on Liberty German's phone, just prior
Richard M.
Williams being abducted. The individual in that picture matches the description of
From
Allen. Detective Liggett believes that Richard M. Allen is the individual on the bridge.
on his phone
Richard M. Allen's statements, investigators believe that Richard M. Allen was also
when he was on the trail prior to meeting the girls.
I believe that a search of the residence located at 1967 North Whiteman Drive, Delphi,
Indiana, located in Carroll County, as well as the outbuilding, the vehicles and the property will lead
I have probable cause to believe that there

myself and other investigators to evidence of Murder.
a search
will be evidence located on the property of this offense. Due to the aforementioned reasons,
warrant is being requested to enter the property of Richard M. Allen, DOB; 09/09/1972 located at
law enforcement
1967 North Whiteman Drive, Delphi, Indiana located in Carroll County, ordering
to seize any evidence that is related Murder.
I afirm, under penalty of perjury as specified in LC. 35-44.1-2-l , that the foregoing
Respectfully submitted this l; day of October, 2022.
V'
i gett
Detectivflglv
Carroll Coun Sherifl's Department
Approved By:
A/nrc "W
E
MAY
EL
012023
D
fimmm
.
.w
STATE OF INDIANA )
) CLERK CARROLL CERCUkT COURT
COUNTY OF CARROLL )
) CAUSE NUMBER: OSCOl-ZZIO-MC- 8L4

)
RETURN
WARRANT on the
ecutcd this '3 day of (Hum/l ,
I, the
2022,a1 m
undersigz'cd,
4: o'clock P .M.
follo were toWit
g" 521::
mfifi yLlggett
Shedfi's Depamncnt
STATE'S
'-
EXHIBIT
§
§
E! .2"
8o
INDMNA STATE POLICE Lab Case 9 19K«06197
'57
iii;
v PROPERTY RECORD AND RECEIPT
) State Form 23954 (Rm-01> v2022 :5? Cam| 17ISPC601748
*"l )
Page 1 of 2
3"
This form will expire 07/0 V2023. For on pda fed version, 90 to wwwjn'gav/isp/Iabs
Lab Use
lbP' Case I 17ISPCBB1748 "W
Type of investigation Death
_
Reiated Case Numbers
lnvestigatflng Officer Detective M. Jay Harper PE 4562 Submitting Officer SGT Matt Clemans PE 9202
Date
-
im/ia/zozz i Timeiiszoe Fr
Person
0 Place
IndMduaiI Richard AIIen
County
Carroii I
Suspect
Location 1967 Whiteman Dr. Delphi, Indiana
Witness to recovery ISP District/Section 14-Lafayette
Lab Use
'9 I
if?
..
item No Description of ltemis) Submitted
Seviai Number
Sealed cardboard box containing one black Sig Sauer P226 .40 Calmer handgun.
MC8
U625627.
box on
Sealed piastic bag containing one .40 caiiber S&W cartridge found in wooden keepsake
MC9 master bedroom .
dresser between both closets in
Sauer P226 handgun
"(:19 Seaied piastic bag containing one .40 caiiber S&W cartridge found inside Sig
and one
Sealed piastic bag containing two magazines, one fiiied with nine .40 caiiber cartridges
MC11
with eight .40 caiiber cartridges.
one trigger lock with
Seaied paper bag containing one black Sig Sauer handgun case containing
"€12
two keys.
two 'Audiovox"
Sealed paper bag containing a papa: wrapped wooden weave box containing
siiver Motoroia MSN:865 30XP771 , om siiver Motoroia flip phone
MC13 device. one flip phone
MSNfloS BDXPGZ i, 4 car chargers , (twee waii outiet chargera
MC14 Sealed piastic bag containing one Lexar compact flash 1 68 memory card. I
Lafayettc District.
-~-
--
Lab I: IK-QMST RON: 17-03391

Carroll County Shtrlf f
iii M $3
Ch aim of§g2.t_m.&g§ 2
r
§G "I? INDIANA STATE POLICE Lab Case 1
a; -.1
v.0
PROPERTY RECORD AND RECEIPT
#14 Slate Form 23964 (Rm-o1) v2022 IS? Case a 17ISPC961748
)'z
x)
.. Page 1 of :1
5!! This form will expire 07/01/2023. For an updated vernon, go to www.in.gov/isp/Iabs
" g.
bUs '
":f-,jy::l,"":"_; :j fil': 37$
lSP Case # 17ISPC061748 L'ab'Case 1t
Related Case Numbers Type of Investigation Death Investigation
Investigating Officer
Date
Jay Harper
.
F
pe
(o'Person
uhmitting O _
Tvoopet Vida pg
(A Place
Individual 1 Richard Allen Suspect
Location 1967 Whiteman Dr. Delphi

County Carroll
Witness to recovery Trooper Vido lSP District/Section 14Lafayette
Lab Use
labfiew
item No. Description of ltemis) Submitted
DRV164 Sealed paper bag containing one pair of dirty Thorogood boots size 7.5 mens.
DRV165 Sealed paper bag containing one pair of dirty black boots, size 6.5 regular
I
DRV166 Sealed envelope containing one silver double edged knife in a silver
metal sheath. I
DRV167 Sealed envelope containing one brown gold and silver folding knife.
I
DRVIGS Sealed envelope containing black sheath containing one brown gold and
silver folding knife. I
silver bladed imperial
Sealed envelope containing one black sheath containing one black handled
DRV199
knife.
DRVllB Sealed envelope one black sheath containing one fold'able knife with a red! gold
handle. I
DRVlll Sealed envelope one sheath containing two Ozark Trail knives.
DRV112 Sealed envelope one black sheath containing one knife with
a wood! ivory handle and gold guard. El
one 'Sharp' 2 bladed folding
Sealed envelope containing one rusted "Old Timer' folding knife, I
DRV113 "Gerber " knife, and one black folding knife.
knife, one black folding
DRV114
Sealed envelope containing on red handled 'Crosley" multi-to
l Guard multi-to ol. and one black
ol, one blue mum-tool, one green
multi~to ol.
I
and gold lndiana Nationa
Sealed envelope containing one black sheath containing
abrown handle d, silver bladed "Sabre" I
DRVIIS
bowie knife.
red stripes- ADiDAS. I
DRV116 Sealed paper bag containing one blue jacket with
irt. I
DRV117 Sealed paper bag containing one blue 1/4 zip sweatsh
'FOX' hooded sweatshirt.
DRV118 Sealed paper bag containing one black and green
End" coat.
DRV119 Sealed paper bag containing one black and gray "North
" coat
DRV129 Sealed paper bag containing one blue 'Carham
and boots. Size 8.
DRV121 Sealed paper bag containing one pair timberl
"Arizona" jeanssize 34x29
DRV122 Sealed paper bag containing one pair of blue
Chain ofCustod _on Page. 4.

"A STATE POLICE
INDIANA LabCasei
'9' \O PROPERTY RECORD AND RECEIPT

12" x'
'l Stale Form 23964 (R2/9-01) v2022 ISP Case a 17ISPC001748
g} u)
82
Page 2 of g
This (am will expire 07/01/2023. for an updated version, go to www.mgovfisp/Iabs
Lab Use
Lab Item
item No. Description of ltemls) Submitted
DRV123 Sealed paper bag containing one pair of blue "Arizona" jeans size 34x29. I
DRV124 Sealed paper bag containing one pair of blue "Arizona" jeans size 34X29
I
DRV12S Sealed paper bag containing one pair of blue Levi Strauss jeans size 34x29
I
DRV126 Sealed paper bag containing one pair of blue Levi Strauss jeans size 34x29
I
I
DRV127 Sealed paper bag containing one winter gray hat with fur like fibers.
rt
DRV128 Sealed paper bag containing one black and red "UFC" hooded sweatshirt with
a full zip. I
I
DRV129 Sealed paper bag containing one 1/4 zip "George" sweatshirt.
DRV139 Sealed paper bag containing one black/blue 1/4 zip 'Waimart" sweatshirt.
I
DRV131 Sealed paper bag containing one blue "George" sweatshirt, U4 Zip.
DRVl 32 Sealed paper bag containing one blue "Kenneth Cole" sweatshirt. I
DRV133 Sealed paper bag containing one blue "Fruit of the Loom" sweatshirt.
DRVl 34 Sealed 'paper bag containing one blue "Starter" sweatshirt.

DRV135 Sealed paper bag containing one black "Spider" hooded sweatshirt.
DRVI 36 Sealed paper bag containing one blue sweatshirt with an old label.
I
I
DRV137 Sealed paper bag containing one blue Adidas sweatshirt.
DRV1 38 Sealed paper bag containing one brown fitted cap with a small bill.
Sealed paper bag containing one black WRl stocking cap, one black 'NASCA
R' Ford Racing
S"
DRV139 stocking cap, one black "ADiDA stocking cap, one red/whi te, and gray/br own Canada stocking I
cap.
I
DRV149 Sealed ing one gray and black "ADIDAS" skull cap
paper bag contain
DRV141 Sealed paper bag containing one gray and white NFL Colts skuil cap
I
..
DRV142 Sealed paper bag containing one brown Carhartt stocking cap.
DRV143 Sealed paper bag containing ten pairs of gloves and

extra giove.
I
DRV144 Sealed paper bag containing one blue fabric strap, and
one blue/green fabric strap/ I
DRV14S Sealed cardboard box containing one HP laptop
Serial: CN3051 i779 I
Serial: CNF7496KTS
DRV146 Sealed cardboard box containing one HP Pavilion Laptop
headbands.
DRV147 Sealed paper bag containing one plastic bag containing multiple
box containing misc cellular information
DRV148 Sealed paper bag containing one cardboard phone
DRV149 Sealed paper bag containing one Winchester Supreme

Elite empty ammo box. I
DRV1 59
Sealed envelope containing one smaller envelope containing
one cruzer micro 268 flash drive I
with Rick on the back.
DRVISl Sealed envelope containing a 1TB western digital hardrive.
I
(Min of C lLSIQdY on P008 3%

5&9 INDIANA STATE POLICE Lab Case :0
8/224. PROPERTY RECORD AND RECEIPT
State Form 23964 (912/901) v2022 [SP Case w 17ISPC661748
.1
'
Page of 4
This fonn will expire 07/01/2023. For an upd ovfisp/Iobs
Lab Use
Qtllx
Lab item
No item No. Description of ltemls) Submitted
DRV1 S 2 Sealed envelope containing one Samsung phone in a floral case.

I
DRV153 Sealed envelope containing miniature katana with a red tassel. I
DRV154 Sealed envelope containing one black sheath and one Rapaia filet knife from garage.
DRVISS Sealed envelope containing one black sheath and one "The Best Defense'
knife from garage. D
DRV156 Sealed envelope containing one black external hard drive and cord. Serial
WX20A99F4518. Cl
DRV157 Sealed envelope containing one smaller envelope containing one black lPod
serial 716016DTJT. D
DRV1SB
Sealed envelope containing one smaller envelope containing one 32MB 50 card
and one 256MB
I
SD card.
DRV159
Sealed cardboard box containing one black sheath with an animal imprinted
from
on the front and one
I
large wooden handled knife with a rusted blade garage.
DRV169 Sealed paper bag containing five miscellaneous vehicle chargers.

I
DRV161 Sealed paper bag containing nine miscellaneous wall outletchargers.

I
DRV162 Sealed paper bag containing miscellaneous phone accessories.
DRV163 Sealed paper bag containing one HP laptop charger.

I
DRV164 Sealed paper bag containing two pagers, one black and one blue.
I
DRV165 Sealed paper bag containing three Motorola and one LG flip phones.
I
DRV166 Sealed envelope containing one LG Verizon smart phone.
DRV167 Sealed paper bag containing one cardboard box containing

one LG Verizon side slide smart phone. I
DRV168 Sealed envelope containing one Motorola Verizon smart phone.
I
one Aodiovox, one Nokia, and one Motorola.
DRV169 Sealed envelope containing three older cell phones.
one Nokia 7705 Twist cell phone and
T DRV176
Sealed paper bag containing one cardboard box containing
I
1
documents.
"
;, DRV171
Sealed cardboard Garmin box containing one Garmin StreetPl
iot c340 device, two cords, and I
documentation.
a custom vehicle operations motorcycle
Sealed cardboard box containing a plastic bag containing
DRV172
cover bag containing a motorcycle cover.
3a XL cellphone MEiD 35964309505164 with
a
Sealed manila envelope containing a black Pixel
DRV173
black Otterbox case
A42 56 Serial Number: RSCRSONHEA
Sealed manila envelope containing a black Samsung Galaxy
DRV174
with a brown case
sealed by Steve Mullin containing one Aquafina
Sealed paper bag containing a sealed paper bag
DRV175
water bottle
wireless flip phone
DRV176 Sealed manila envelope containing a silver, LG, Cingular
Chain of Custodian Pagg <1

/(fl .z-s'ru-
1:3"
INDIANA STATE POLICE LabCasel 19K00197
'/ PROPERTY RECORD AND RECEIPT
(I Stair! F0"?! 23964 (Rm-0') v2022 ISP Case n 17ISPC091748
Page 1 of g
This form will expire 07/0 1 I7023. F0! an updated version, go to www. in.gov/isp/Iabs
'7
L bUse
iSP Case ii 17ISPC661748 Lab Case 9
'y wax99197
Type of Investigation Death
_
Related Case Numbers
investigating Officer Detective M. Jay Harper PE 4562 Submitting Office! SGT Matt Clemens P5 9202
Date
individual 1
-
110/14/2022
Richard Allen
Time[13:54
From
Suspect
?) Person
0 Piece
County Tippecanoe Location 5921 N 43 N West Lafayette/ indiana State Police District 14 Post
Witness to recovety iSP District/Section 14~Lafayette
Lab Use
Lab Rem
item No Description of ltem(s) Submitted
of the Ford
Sealed envelope containing a cutting of a carpeted area underneati'i the spare tire
MC15
Focus.
driver iap bait and
Sealed enveiope containing iwo piastic wrappers containing one swab from a El
MC16
one swab of the driver shouider beit of the Ford Focus.
the passenger side
Sealed envelope containing two plastic wrappers containingtwo swabs from [3
MC17
carpeted floor boards.
---
Lu nycua Luau-Act ---
Ltb I: 19K-00197 RON: 17-00091

Carroll County Sheriff
i iiiiiii Wiimiiii
Chain of Custody on Page 2
)SS:
COUNTY 0F CARROLL ) CASE NUMBER: 08C01-2210-MR-0000\_
STATE 0F INDIANA )
)
ENTERED
V. ) October 28, 2022
I CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT
RICHARD M. ALLEN ) KA
On October 28, 2022, State of Indiana (the “State”), by Prosecuting Attorney,
Nicholas C. McLeland, filed a Verified Request to Prohibit Public Access to a Court Record.
The Court, being duly advised, now FINDS as follows.
1) Ind. Code § 35-34-1-1 allows for the sealing of an information.

2) Indiana Rules of Court, Rules on Access to Court Records, Rule 6(A) provides for
both the request and the record(s) themselves (if any) to be deemed confidential
until a hearing on the request may be conducted.
Therefore, the Court, being duly advised, GRANTS the State of Indiana's Petition.
Pending public hearing, which shall be held no earlier than twenty (20) days of the posting
of notice of the hearing, by the State, in compliance with the Access to Public Records Act.
The State shall provide notice of the public hearing in compliance with Rule 6 of the
Rules on Access to Court Records: Said hearing shall be conducted in the Carroll Circuit
Court Room at the following date and time: 2 2 20 A ,’ do A—m
The request and all court records are ordered sealed, and are deemed confidential
under Indiana Rules of Court, Rules on Access to Court Records, Rule 6, pending public
hearing, as scheduled above.

So ORDERED this 28th day of October, 2022.
Benjamin A. Diener, Judge\

pc:
State: Atty. Nicholas C. McLeland
Defendant: C/O Sheriff of Carroll County
Date: October 27, 2022
STATE OF INDIANA CAUSE NUMBER 08C01-2210-MR- I

VS
RICHARD M. ALLEN
1967 Whiteman Drive,
Delphi, IN 46923
DOB: 9/9/1972
SSN: XXX-XX-3934
The Court will please enter the following minutes:
State of Indiana by Nicholas C. McLeland, Prosecuting Attorney, files probable cause affidavit executed
by Tony Liggett and information for: Count 1: Murder, a Felony; and Count 2: Murder, a Felony.
The Defendant being1n custody, the court determines that does exist. The Court sets bond
in this matter at probablecause
<$ 20 000, 000. GAR

“Caé‘q 0r
+W‘iv (mi itch (”fur-via M17
Initial hearing15 set at (O- 30 Mn: 7044;71-
O’KI.
«bail
Entry Approved: ‘0 33’ 9(93~

en . lener,
/s/Nicholas C. McLeland
Attorney # 28300—08
ENTEREDOCT 2 8
2022
CARROLL
CIRCUIT
COURT
STATE OF INDIANA
STATE 0F INDIANA
V. CAUSE N0. 08C01-2210-MR-1
RICHARD M. ALLEN
DOB: 09/09/1972
SSN: XXX-XX-3934
PRE-OMNIBUS ORDER
This cause is set for trial by jury on March 20, 2023, at 9:00 a.m. as a first setting.
The omnibus date is January 13, 2023. Pre-trial conference is set for January 13, 2023,
at 9:00 a.m. at which time the defendant and counsel for the parties are ORDERED and
DIRECTED to appear.
DISCOVERY. Discovery shall be completed as provided by Local Criminal Rule

1.
LR08-CR00-18 on or before the fifteenth day prior to the trial date.
2. PRE-OMNIBUS MEETING 0F ATTORNEYS. Trial counsel for the defense and

State shall meet prior to the omnibus hearing; in the absence of agreement as to the time
and place of meeting, they shall meet at a place designated by the State and shall undertake
and consider the following:
A. They shall complete the Omnibus Report which shall then be filed with the
Court prior to the omnibus hearing.
B. They shall exchange lists of the names and addresses of witnesses and
exhibits.
C. They shall discuss simplifications of the issues, motions then pending or
which may be filed before the commencement of trial, stipulations, theories
of prosecution and defense, and plea negotiations, if any.
3. OMNIBUS HEARING. All cases scheduled for trial on the date set in this order
will be scheduled for Omnibus Hearing at the same time. The Court will first determine if
the parties contemplate the entry of a plea of guilty by the defendant, either with or
without a plea agreement. If there is to be a plea of guilty, the plea will be entered
following any other scheduled Omnibus Hearings. The court will not accept a plea
agreement after the Omnibus Hearing without a showing of good cause why the plea
agreement could not have been reached at or prior to the Omnibus Hearing.
If no plea of guilty is entered, the Court will determine whether any cases with an
earlier filing date or cases which the Court has assigned a higher priority remain scheduled
for the same trial date. If there are none, then the trial date will stand, oth
trial date will be set. ENTE R E D
0U 2 8 2022

4. WITNESSES AND EXHIBIT. Lists of witnesses and exhibits in writing shall be
prepared, exchanged, and filed with the Court at the omnibus hearing.
5. IURY INSTRUCTIONS. Preliminary and final instructions shall be tendered to the

Court and exchanged by the parties no later than three court days prior to the trial. The
Court will permit the tender of additional instructions during the trial on matters which
could not reasonably have been anticipated in advance of trial. Counsel shall not refer to or
read any proposed instructions to the jury in voir dire examination, opening statement, or
otherwise, unless such instruction has been previously submitted to and approved by the
Court.
ENTERED this 28‘“ day of October 2022.
Benjamin A. Diener, Judge

pc: State: Attorney Nicholas C. McLeland

Defendant: Richard M. Allen c/o Sheriff of Carroll County, Indiana
STATE 0F INDIANA ) IN THE CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT
)SS:
COUNTY 0F CARROLL ) To THE 2022 TERM E NTE RE D
November 2, 2022
STATE 0F INDIANA CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT
g KA
v. ) CASE NUMBER: 08C01-221o-MR-1
I
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
A public hearing will be conducted pursuant to Ind. Code § 5-14-3-55 and Indiana
Rules of Court, Rules on Access to Court Records, Rule 6, November 22, 2022 at 9:00 a.m. in
the Carroll Circuit Court.
Parties or members of the general public will be permitted to testify and submit written
briefs, subject to reasonable time constraints imposed by the Court.

A decision to seal all or part of a public record must be based on findings of fact and
conclusions of law, showing that the remedial benefits to be gained by effectuating the public
policy of the state declared in section 1 of this chapter are outweighed by proof by a
preponderance of the evidence by the person seeking the sealing of the record that:
l) A public interest will be secured by sealing the record;
2) Dissemination of the information contained in the record will create a serious and
imminent danger to that public interest;
3) Any prejudicial effect created by dissemination of the information cannot be
avoided by any reasonable method other than sealing the record;
4) There is a substantial probability that sealing the record will be effective in
protecting the public interest against the perceived danger; and
5) It is reasonably necessary for the record to remain sealed for a period of time.
Sealed records shall be unsealed at the earliest possible time afier the circumstances necessitating
the sealing of the records no longer exist.
SO ORDERED this 2nd day of November, 2022.
Benjamin A. Diener,
Iudge\
PC:
Defendant: c/o Carroll County Sheriff
STATE OF INDIANA ) IN THE CARROLL CIRCUIT COUR'E NTE RE D
COUNTY 0F CARROLL To THE 2022 TERM NOV 0 3 2022
gss;
STATE 0F mm AN A CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT

)
v. I CASE NUMBER: 08c01-221o-MR-1
RICHARD M. ALLEN I
WE
On November 2, 2022, Tobe H. Leazenby, Sheriff of Carroll County, filed a Request by
the Sheriff of Carroll County to Transfer inmate from Carroll County Jail to the Custody of the
Indiana Department of Corrections for Safekeeping.
The Court, being duly advised, FINDS that Defendant is an inmate awaiting trial and is in
imminent danger of serious bodily injury or death, or represents a substantial threat to the
safety of others. This FINDING is not predicated on any acts or alleged acts of the Defendant,
since arrest, rather a toxic and harmful insistence on “public information” about Defendant and
this case.
In general, this Court has thirty (30) days to rule on any Motion that is filed by a Party in
any case. See Ind. Trial Rule 53.1(A).
Yet, concurrent to the actual case naturally occurring, this judicial officer keeps getting
direct requests from non-parties for "public information," claiming that this officer has seven
(7) days or one (1) day, when hand delivered, to respond to the request or face litigation!
While this officer is responsible for the entirety of the Circuit Court docket it attempts to
ignore the maelstrom of "interest" from the public, it is known that YouTube already hosts
content regarding family members of this judicial officer, including photos.
The public's blood lust for information, before it exists, is extremely dangerous. ALL
PUBLIC SERVANTS administering this action do not feel safe and are not protected.
The Carroll County Sheriff has limited resources to conduct its base operations, let alone
any duties mandated by our Supreme Court.
All Defendants in all actions are presumed innocent. All public information will be
available the second it exists. None of the family members of public servants are part of this
action. All of the public servants are simply people doing their jobs. Most of the public
servants are woefully underpaid. Most of the "public interest" consists of people attempting to
raise their status or profit financially.
When the public peddles misinformation with reckless abandon, we all are not safe.
Page 1 of 2
As far as the public’s desire to learn about access to court records, that educational
effort cannot be by this officer educating each individual, ad-hoc, whenever they choose to seek
"public information.” These inquiries are inherently disruptive to the operations of the Court
as they are wholly outside the operations of the Court.
As a branch of the Supreme Court, any requests for public information about this action
should be directed to whomever is the public information coordinator for the Courts in general.
lf there is not such a position, our state may need one.
Defendant indicated at the initial hearing an intention to hire private counsel.
Defendant is reminded that he must retain counsel within 20 days of the initial hearing
because there are deadlines for filing motions and raising defenses and, if those deadlines are
missed, the legal issues and defenses that could have been raised will be waived or given up.
If Defendant is unable to retain counsel of his choosing due to financial indigency,
Defendant is reminded that he is entitled to court-appointed counsel and Defendant will be
examined upon request.
The Court notes, for the public, that when Defendant appeared for the initial hearing, he
was clad in protective gear. That protection was not to protect Defendant from the Court. That
protection was to protect Defendant from the public.

Until a finding of guilt or a judgment of conviction occurs, in any case, judgment must be
reserved and the presumption of innocence must be respected and preserved.
Accordingly, pursuant to lnd. Code § 35-33-11-1, the Court ORDERS the Sheriff of
Carroll County to transfer Defendant to a facility of the department of correction designated by
the commissioner of the department as suitable for the confinement of Defendant and provided
that space is available.
So ORDERED this 3rd day of November, 2022. ‘R I
Benjamin. iener, Ju
pc: Prosecuting Attorney KA

Defendant C/O Sheriff of Carroll County
Sheriff of Carroll County
Page 2 of 2
COUNTY OF CARROLL 358: TO THE 2022 TERM
STATE OF INDIANA )
V. g CASE NUMBER: 08C01-2210-MR-1
RICHARD M. ALLEN g
The Judge of Carroll Circuit Court has determined that the particular circumstances
within the underlying case warrant recusal and dictate that a special judge be appointed in
this case. The Court hereby recuses itself.
Pursuant to L.R.08-CR13-19(C), this Court has determined that no judicial officer

within the county may preside over this case.
This Court now Certifies this matter to the Indiana Supreme Court for appointment
of a special judge in compliance with L.R.08—CR13-19(B),(C).
SO ORDERED this 3rd day of November 2022.
Benjamin A. Diener, judge\

PC: State: Atty. Nicholas C. McLeland

Defendant:
Inge Ind. Code § 35-33-114 E N TE R E D
<DaStephens@idoc.in.gov>
NOV 0 3 2022
Indiana Supreme Court
Office of judicial Administration CARROLL CIRCUIT
COURT
Via E-mail <justin.forkner@courts.lN.gov>
Page 1 of l
STATE OF INDIANA ) 1N TEE CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT
)SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL) CAUSE NO. 08C01-2210-MR1
STATE OF INDIANA, )
Plaintiff, )
)
VS. ) ORDER OR JUDG1\/1ENT OF THE COURT
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN, )
Defendant. )
Court finds Defendant is unable to hire counsel and is entitled to Court-appointed counsel and
investigation.
Court appoints Attorney Bradley Rozzi and Attorney Andrew Baldwin as contract Public
Defenders. Counsel instructed to enter their written appearance and be available for hearing
November 22, 2022, at 9:00 a.m.
Dated: November l4, 2022

Fr ces C. Gull, Special Judge
C 011 Circuit Court
11 County, Indlana
NOTICE T0 BE GIVEN BY: COURT _XX_ CLERK OTHER
PROOF 0F NOTICE UNDER TRIAL RULE 72(0)

or personally distributed to the
A copy of this entry was served either by mail to the address of record, deposited in the attorney's distribution box,
following persons:
cc: Defendant
Bradley Rozzi
Andrew Baldwin
Prosecuting Attorney Nicholas McLeland
Court File
DATED:
INITIAL OF PERSON WHO NOTIFIED PARTIES: COURT CLERK
)SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL) CAUSE NO. 08C01-2210MR-1
STATE OF INDIANA, )
Plaintiff, )
)
VS. ) ORDER OR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN, )
Defendant. )
COURTHOUSE MANAGEMENT AND DECORUM ORDER

FOR HEARING NOVEMBER 22, 2022 AT 9:00 A.M.
This case has generated substantial public interest and media attention. In light of this, and on
the Court's own motion to ensure the integrity of the proceedings, to protect the Defendant's
constitutional rights for due process, to ensure the safety of the parties and the public, and to pemiit
public access to criminal proceedings, the Court sets forth the following rules and guidelines for the
hearing set for Tuesday, November 22, 2022, in the Carroll Circuit Court.
1. The Courthouse will open at 8:00 a.m. All entrances will be closed, except for the
handicapped entrance on the north side of the building. The remaining entrances will be
locked with no access to the public.
2. All members of the public, including members of the media, are subject to screening by
metal detectors. All bags in possession of those entering the building are subject to search.
3. NO weapons of any kind are permitted in the building, except for on-duty law enforcement
officers providing security to the Courthouse and the parties.
4. Cellular telephones are permitted in the building, but must be powered OFF and unused at
all times while in the building or the Courtrooms. Violations are subject to seizure and
destruction of the cellular telephone.
5 No electronic equipment or devices are permitted in the Carroll Circuit Court.
Media personnel are permitted to attend the Court session. NO cameras, electronics, lap
tops or recording equipment of any kind is permitted on the Second Floor and the Third
Floor of the Courthouse nor inside the Circuit Courtroom. All such equipment is limited
to the First Floor of the Courthouse. The Court requests the media be mindfirl that other
County offices are conducting business in the building unrelated to this case. Media and
members of the public are ordered to conduct themselves in such a fashion as to limit
disruption to the offices, personnel, and patrons of those offices.
7 The Media are free to use the public areas outside the Courthouse as long as they do not
obstruct traffic in the streets and sidewalks surrounding the Courthouse.
Seating in the Carroll Circuit Court is limited. The first row of public seats behind the bar
separating the well of the courtroom from the public is unavailable for seating. The Sheriff
of Carroll County or his designee will ensure that the victim representatives are seated.
The remaining seating is available until full. No one, other than Court Security, will be
permitted to stand in the Courtroom. All spectators must remain seated until the
conclusion of the hearing and the parties have left the Courtroom.
No food or beverages are permitted inside the Carroll Circuit Court. Water will be
permitted for the parties in the well of the Courtroom.
10. All members of the public and the media are required to follow directives of the Sheriff of
Carroll County, Courthouse Security and Courtroom Security.
11. NO court-produced recording will be made available to the public or media. The audio
record made pursuant to Indiana Criminal Rule 5 may not be copied or used for purposes
other than perpetuating the record.
The Court anticipates that all members of the public and the media will conduct themselves in
an appropriate fashion. Any violation of this Order and any conduct the Court finds disruptive of the
proceedings may result in an order of temporary or permanent exclusion from the Courtroom and/or
Courthouse and is punishable as contempt of Court.
Dated: November 18, 2022

r ces C. Gull, Special Judge
C 01] Circuit Court
011 County, Indiana
NOTICE TO BE GIVEN BY: COURT _XX_ CLERK OTHER
PROOF OF NOTICE UNDER TRIAL RULE 72(D)

A copy of this entry was served of record. deposited in the attorney's distribution box, or personally distributed to the
either by mail to the address
following persons:
cc: Bradley Rozzi Attorney for Defendant

Andretv Baldwin Attorney for Defendant

-

Court File
DATED:
)SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL) .
CAUSE NO. 08C01-2210MR1
STATE OF INDIANA, )
Plaintiff, )
)
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN, )
Defendant. )
Defendant appears in person and with counsel Bradley Rozzi and Andrew Baldwin. State
appears by Prosecuting Attorney Nicholas McLeland. Hearing held on the State's Verified Request
to Prohibit Public Access to a Court Record, filed October 28, 2022.
Matter taken under advisement.
Defendant's Petition to Let to Bail, filed November 21, 2022, ordered set for hearing in the
Carroll Circuit Court February 17, 2023, at 10:00 am. Court will enter a separate transport order for
the defendant. Omnibus date rescheduled to February 17, 2023, at 10:00 a.m. by agreement of
counsel.

1' es C. Gull, Special Judge\
Carr 11 Circuit Court
C oll County, Indiana
NOTICE T0 BE GIVEN BY: COURT _.XX__ CLERK omER

PROOF 0F NOTICE UNDER TRIAL RULE 72(D)
A copy of this entry was served either by mail to the address of record, deposited in the attomey's distribution box, or personally distributed to the
following persons:

Andrew Baldwin Attorney for Defendant


Court File
DATED:
INITIAL 0F PERSON WHO NOTIFIED PARTIES: COURT CLERK
)SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL) CAUSE NO. 08C0 1-2210-1\/IR-1
STATE OF INDLANA, )
Plaintiff; )
)
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN, )
Defendant. )
Court notes filing of a Limited Appearance by Attorneys and a pleading entitled "Media
Intervenors' Pre-Hearing Brief Seeking Public Access to Probable Cause Affidavit and Charging
Information" on November 2.1, 2022. Court takes this matter under advisement following the hearing
conducted on November 22, 2022 on the State's Verified Request to Prohibit Public Access to a Court
Record, filed October 28, 2022.

Fran es C. Gull, Special Judge
Carr 11 Circuit Coufi
\
NOTICE TO BE GIVEN BY: COURT _XX_ CLERK OTHER

or personally distributed to the
A copy of this entry was sewed either by mail to the address of record, deposited in the attorney's distribution box.
following persons:
cc: Bradley Rozi Attorney for Defendant
-
Andrew Baldwin Attomey for Defendant

Prosecuting Attorney Nicholas McLeIand

Court File
DATED:
INITIAL 0F PERSON WHO NOTIFIED PARTIES ; COURT CLERK
)SS:
STATE OF INDIANA, )
Plaintift', )
)
VS. ) ORDER OR' JUDGMENT OF TI-IE COURT
) .
RICHARD M. ALLEN, )
Defendant. )
The Court, having had this matter under advisement following a hearing conducted on
November 22, 2022, and having considered the evidence submitted and the arguments of counsel, now
denies the State's Verified Request to Prohibit Public Access to a Court Record, in part. The Court
finds that the State has failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the Affidavit of Probable
Cause and the Charging Informations should be excluded from public access. The Court finds that
the public interest is not served by prohibiting access, and that the protection and safety of witnesses
can be ensured by redacting their names from the Affidavit, and that the defendant's personal
information can be removed from the Charging Informations.
The Court notes that the Prosecuting Attorney submitted Charging Infonnations and a Probable
Cause Affidavit at the November 22, 2022, hearing that was redacted, eliminating the witnesses' names
and identifying personal information of the defendant. Those documents will be released to the public
and made part of the record of this cause. The original Charging Informations and Affidavit of
Probable Cause shall remain as sealed and confidential Court records as they are not redacted.
The Court further finds that the Media Intervenors' Motion for Leave to Intervene is moot, and
therefore, denied.
Court Orders that the redacted Charging Informations and Affidavit for Probable Cause,
submitted by the State at the hearing conducted on November 22, 2022, be filed with the Clerk of the
Court with this Order, and further that the Clerk shall not release (without prior Court approval) the
original, sealed unredacted Informations and Affidavit

C oll Circuit Court
oll County, Indiana
\
PROOF OF NOTICE UNDER TRIAL RULE 72(D) '

A copy of this entry was served either by mailto the address of record, deposited in the attomey's distribution box, or personally distributed to the
following persons:


Prosecuting Attomey Nicholas MoLeIand

Court File
DATED:
)SS:
STATE OF INDIANA, )
Plaintiff; )
)
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN, )
Defendant. )
Court orders the State's Motion for Order Prohibiting the Parties, Counsel, Law Enforcement
Officials, Court Personnel, Coroner, and Family Members from Disseminating Information or
Releasing any Extra-Judicial Statements by Means of Public Communication and the Defendant's
Verified Motion for Change of Venue fi'om the County set for hearing January I3, 2023, at 10:00 a.m.
in the Carroll Circuit Court. Court to notify.
Dated: December I, 202'2

C oll Circuit Court
\
C rroll County, Indiana
_
NOTICE TO BE GIVEN BY: XX COURT__ CLERK OTHER

A of record, deposited in the attorney's distribution box, or personally distributed to the
copy of this
entry was served either by mail to the address
following persons:
ee: Bradley Rozzi -Attomey for Defendant

Prosecuting Attorney Nicholas MeLel and

Court File
DATED:
I

)SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL) CAUSE NO. 08C01-22lOMR1
STATE OF INDIANA, )
Plaintiff} )
)
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN, )
Defendant. )
On the Court's motion, in response to defendant's undated "Press Release", the Court issues an
order granting the State's Motion for Order Prohibiting the Parties, Counsel, Law Enforcement
or
Officials, Court Personnel, Coroner, and Family Members from Disseminating Information
in whole, pending
Releasing Any Extra-Judicial Statements by Means of Public Communication
a.m. in the Carroll
hearing which the Court has just recently scheduled for January 13, 2023, at. 10:00
Circuit Court.
Counsel for the State of Indiana and the Defendant, as well as their professional staff and other
Law Enforcement Officials, Court Personnel, Coroner, and all family members are
personnel,
to the media, directly or indirectly, by

prohibited from commenting on this case to the public and
themselves or through any intermediary, in any fonn, including any social media platforms.
Counsel are reminded that they are required to conform to the Indiana Rules of Court, Rules of
Professional Conduct, specifically Rule 3.6 Trial Publicity in its entirety, and Rule 3.8 Special
Responsibilities of a Prosecutor in its entirety.

Violations of this Order are punishable as Contempt of Court and subject the violator to a fine
and/or incarceration.
f
I
Dated: December 2, 2022
Fr ces C. Gull, Specgl Judge \
C 011 Circuit Court
011 County, Indiana
NOTICE TO BE GIVEN BY: XX COURT__ CLERK OTHER

A copy of this entry was served either by mail to the address of record, deposited in the attomey's distribution box, or personally distributed to the
following persons:
ee: Bradley Roni Attomey for Defendant
-

Prosecuting Attomey Nicholas McLeland

Sheriff of Carroll County
Indiana State Police
Carroll County Coroner
Court File
DATED:
INITIAL 0F PERSON WHO NOTIFIED-PARTIES: COURT CLERK
)SS:
STATE OF INDIANA, )
Plaintiff, )
)
VS. ) ORDER OR JUDGMENT OF TIIE COURT
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN, )
Defendant. )
Court orders Defendant's Supplemental Motion for Discovery and Request for Rule 404 and
405 Evidence set for hearing January 13, 2023, at 10 a.m. Court further orders Defendant's Ex Parte
Motion and Order Authorizing Funding for Fact Investigator set for ex parte hearing January 13, 2023,
at 11 am.
Dated: January 9, 2023

ra ces C. Gull, Spec1a1 Judge
C Circuit Court
011
C rroll County, Indiana
NOTICE TO BE GIVEN BY: COURT _XX__ CLERK OTHER
PROOF OF NOTICE UNDER TRIAL RULE 72(1))

A copy of this entry was served either by mail to the address of record, deposited in the atlomcy's distribution box, or personaliy distributed to the
following persons:


-
Prosecuting Attorney Nicholas MeLeland

Carroll County Clerk's Ofiiee
Court File
DATED:
IN THE CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT
'
STATE OF INDIANA )
)S S:
COUNTY OF CARROLL) CAUSE NO. 08C012210-MR-l
STATE OF INDIANA, )
Plaintiff, )
)
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN, )
Defendant. )
COURTHOUSE MANAGEMENT AND DECORUM ORDER

FOR LIEARING JANUARY 13. 2023 AT 10:00 A.M.
constitutional rights for due process, to ensure the safety of the parties and the public, and to permit
hearing set for Friday, January 13, 2023, in the Carroll Circuit Court.
1. The Courthouse will open at 8:00 a.m. All entrances will be closed, except for the
2 All members of the public, including members of the media, are subject to screening by
3 N0 weapons of any kind are permitted in the building, except for on-duty law enforcement
4 Cellular telephones are permitted in the building, but must be powered O_FF and unused at
No electronic equipment or devices are permitted in the Carroll Circuit Court.
6 Media personnel are permitted to attend the Court session. N0 cameras, electronics, lap
to the First Floor of the Courthouse. The Court requests the media be mindful that other
disruption to the offices, personnel, and patrons of those offices.
The Media are free to use the public areas outside the Courthouse as long as they do not
8: Seating in the Carroll Circuit Court is limited. The first row of public seats behind the bar
conclusion of the hearing and the parties have lett the Courtroom.
Carroll County, Courthouse Security and Courtroom Security.
other than perpetuating the record.
12. At the conclusion of the scheduled hearing on public pending Motions before the Court, the
Court will conduct an ex parte hearing with the Defendant and defense counsel on the Ex
Parte Motion. The State of Indiana and the public are excluded from this portion of the
hearing and will be asked to leave the Courtroom. Court Security will remain and are
ordered to keep that portion of the proceeding confidential.

Ca oll Circuit Court
arroll County, Indiana

A copy of this entry was served either by mail to the address of record, deposited in the attomey's distribution box. or personally distributed to the
following persons:
ec: Bradley Rozzi Attorney for Defendant



Carroll County Sherifi's Department
Court File
DATED:
)ss:
COUNTY 0F CARROLL) CAUSE NO. 08C01-2210-MR1
STATE OF INDIANA,
)))))))
Plaintiff,
VS. ORDER OR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
RICHARD M. ALLEN,
Defendant.
Defendant appears in person and with counsel; State appears by Prosecuting Attorney
McLeland.
Hearing conducted on pending issues.
Having previously granted the State's Motion to Prohibit Communication, pending hearing,
and having discussed the matter with counsel in chambers, the Court now grants in whole the State's
Motion for Order Prohibiting the Parties, Counsel, Law Enforcement Officials, Court Personnel,
Coroner, and Family Members from Disseminating Information or Releasing any Extra-Judicial
Statements by Means of Public Communication.
Court takes Defendant's Supplemental Motion for Discovery and Request for Rule 404 and 405
Evidence under advisement as counsel continue to work diligently to exchange discoverable
information.
Court acknowledges the Defendant's Motion for Change of Venue and agrees a jury could not
be obtained in Carroll County. Pursuant to I.C. 35-36-6-11, a jury will be selected from another
county and transported to Carroll County for trial. Counsel to notify the 'Court within a week if they
can agree to a specific county.

Fran es C. Gull, Special Judge
Carr 11 Circuit Court
Carr ll County, Indiana
\
NOTICE TO BE GIVEN BY: XX COURT_ CLERK OTHER

A copy of this entry was sewed either by mail lo the address of record. deposited in the attorney's distribution box, or personally distributed to the
following persons:

Andrew Baldwin Attomey for Defendant

Prosecuting Attorney Nicholas MeLcIand

.Sheriff of Carroll County
Indiana State Police
Carroll County Coroner
Court File
DATED:
)SS:
STATE OF INDIANA, )
Plaintiff, )
)
.)
RICHARD M. ALLEN, )
Defendant. )
The parties having filed their Stipulation Regarding Defendant's Verified Motion for Change
of Venue from the County on January 20, 2023, and the Court having examined same, the Court hereby
Orders that the jury venire shall be drawn from Allen County and trial shall be conducted in Carroll
_
County.
Dated: January 24, 2023 WQ 9Q

'r
C
C. Gull, Special Judge
065
011 Circuit Court
moll County, Indiana
NOTICE T0 BE GIVEN BY: XX COURT__ CLERK OTHER
PROOF 0F NOTICE UNDER TRIAL RULE 72(0)

A copy of this entry was of record, deposited in the attomey's distribution box, or personally distributed
served either by mail to the address to the
following persons:
ee: Bradley Rozzi Attomcy for Defendant


ProscCuting Attorney Nicholas McLeland

Coun File
DATED:
INITIAL 0F PERSON WHO NOTIFIED PARTIES: COUR'I' CLERK
)SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL) CAUSE NO. 08C012210-MR1
STATE OF INDIANA, )
Plaintiff, )
)
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN, )
Defendant. )
On the Court's Motion, and with the consent of the parties, the hearing scheduled on February
l7, 2023, at 10:00 a.m. on Defendant's Petition to Let Bail will be continued and the resetting of same
will be conducted with the attorneys, the Defendant, and the Court appearing remotely February 17',
2023, at 1:30 p.m. Court orders the Transport Order for Defendant cancelled.
Dated: February 16, 2023

ra ces C. Gull, Special Judge
Car oll Circuit Court
Ca oll County, Indiana
NOTICE 'l'O BE GWEN BY: XX COURT_ CLERK OTHER
PROOF 0F NOTICE UNDER TRIAL RULIE 72(1))

A copy of this entry was served either by mail to the address of record, deposited in the uttomcy's distribution box. or personally distributed to the
following persons:
ee: Bradley Rozzi Attorney for Defendant



Carroll County Sheriff's Department
lndiana Department of Correction
Court File
DATED:
)SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL) CAUSE NO. 08C012210MRl
STATE OF INDIANA, )
Plaintiff, )
)
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN, )
Defendant. )
To accommodate Department of Correction availability, the hearing currently set for February
17, 2023, at 1:30 pm. is reset to February 17, 2023, at 12:30 pm.

Fr
C
cos
011
c. Gull, Sféial Judge
Circuit Court
\
NOTICE TO BE GIVEN BY: XX COUR'I'_,__ CLERK OTHER
PROOF OF NOTICE UNDER TRIAI. RULE 72(D)

A copy of this entry was of record, deposited in the attomcy's distribution box, or personally distributed
served either by mail to the address to the
following persons:
cc: Bradley Roui Attorney for Defendant



Court File
DATED:
STATE OF INDIANA .
_ ') .- .. IN THE CARROLL COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
) SS.
COUNTY OF MARION CAUSE NO. 08C01-2210-MR-00000-l
STATE OF INDIANA
)))))))))
Plaintiff,
v.
RICHARD M. ALLEN,
Defendant.
ORDER GRANTING MEDIA INTERVENORS' RENEVVED MOTION TO INTERVENE

AND MOTION TO GRANT PUBLIC ACCESS
TO THE STATE'S VERIFIED REQUEST TO PROHIBIT PUBLIC ACCESS
The matter before the Court is the Renewed Motion to Intervene and Motion to Grant
Public Access to the State's Verified Request to Prohibit Public Access filed by the Media
Intervenors (the "Motion").1 The Court, having considered both Motions and being duly advised,
finds that the Motions should be GRANTED.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADIUDGED, AND DECREED THAT the Media
Intervenors ar'e granted leave to intervene, and the State's Verified' Request to Prohibit Public
Access filed on October 28, 2022 shall be released to the public. The Clerk is directed to make the
Verified Request available to the public on the docket.
Dated: 9x" I" ' 3-083 Fra ces C. Gull, Sficial Judge
Ca 011 Circuit Court
Distribution: All counsel of record.
'
The "Media Intervenors" refer to the following entities collectively: Indiana Broadcasters Association, Inc.; Hoosier
State Press Association, Inc.; The Associated Press; Circle City Broadcasting I, LLC d/b/a WISH-TV; E.W. Scripps
Company d/b/a WRTV; Nexstar Media Inc. d/b/a WXIN/W'I'I'V; Nenhcff Media Lafayette, LLC; Woof Boom Radio
LLC; TEGNA Inc. d/b/a WTHR; Gannett Satellite Information Networlc, LLC d/b/a The Indianapolis Star; and
American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. dlb/a ABC News.
l
srArE OF INDIANA ) ;
'
]N THE CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT
.
_
.
_
..
)ss:
CQUNTY OF CARROLL )
:' :srArE OF INDIANA:- ) 'CAUSENUMBE'R: qsC01'22.10-'1\«1Rl0006'1
vs. )
.
-. )
RICHARD M. ALLEN ) :-
ORDER
Comes now the Court, the State of Indiana, by Nicholas C. McLeIand,
ProseCuting
3
having filed its' Motion Requesting Protective Order Governing

'
'5; the
.. z
Attorney, D1scovery, and
Co'urt being duly advised 1n the premises, said Motion and the State, the Defendant
.
inow grants
arid Counsel for the Defendant, are now instructed and ORDERED as follows:
Eff/"ti
.
i 2'
Defendant. l.' -
.i L;«.'..'"'|'}-- in. -L(thi:-
'
,
l
2. That no additional copies of the discovery material shall be made by the
.
Defendant, Defendant's Counsel, investigator, expert or any other representative
or agent of the Defendant for any reason.
3. That the discovery material shall het'be used for any purpose other than to
prepare
for the defense in the abovereferenced cause number. : i
.
_. .'Ii, ,
. -II. '1' 4.. _

. That the discoveryI material shall not be publicly exhibited, displayed, shown,-.used
'
£15.. hm 1-.
foreducational, research or demonstrative purposes or used in anygothen manner,
I ,-except'.in'. judicial proceedings in the above referenced action.
a
"find g.
'
5. That the;di_scovem material mayzbe viewed only by parties,:counsel.andgcounsel's

-
'
investigatOrs and experts.
6. That if c.0pies of the discovery material are made and provided to theIDefendant,
investigators or experts for- the Defense, that sensitive and private information .
contained in the discoveryshall be redacted, including any social security

numbers,,*IDAC informationnr NCIC information, any 1nformat10nIrelatedltothe
personal linforrnation ofjuveniles; including social security numbers, names and ,
date ofbirth and any FBI sentinel. information. '

-
' -"._.,,'._ Iil'i|1'-.1iln""'."
'i .:'".1:'.1:.:::.E .-
2 . :' 1'»); 5
1.131 .. -
.-
;._;'..':- shitting;
'1 ' '
-.__i=...:_
L:-' -
t;.'.::2 =:. l. «11".: .
".
...'1
'
'i'l'. 1H'.'i.i.':'."-l|'- ~
.l 'E'l. . 31' "'5'" ' =1
. 1.:-'_:I
:
.l'liiL'lIiH'lHr'! -
if ]E
,
IC
-"' a";
'
'
'
.-.u=.r°s
' i i, "ii l._.
1'33":
.
:.
-
.
.41.;
gas-2"... .
'5'
-
7 '
That none ofthe discovery m'aterial'shall be divulged to any pers'on'ndt authorized! :f':'
t'c')'- 'vi'evv:the discovery material; thiS'inchi'des other witnesses, family members'
relatives and friends of theFDefendantl.l--l ' »:

--
-.::;1 "u: :;=--.-..
.
;..-. :;-._._ '="--';'«.'-i
1:
8. That: no person other than the Defendant, Counsel for the Defendant and those
i- . personS'-listed in paragraph tit-shallllié granted access to
said diseoiIery material, or
'3
'
unle'ss that personihas- signed an agreementin

the substance of any portion-"thereof
,- .-
Hi
"
I -
writing that he'or she has received. a copy of this Order and- th'athe or she Submits
'
torithe'Court's jurisdiction a'n'dfauthority with respect' to the discovery; agrees to be! .
subject to the Court's contempt powers for any violation of this Order; and
..
is
'
|,_. '-,{'l= l":

gianted prior permission by this Cb'urt to" access said discovery.
'9. That upon final disposition of the case, the discovery material referred to in
paragraph 1 and any and all transcripts shall be returned to the Carroll County .
"
._ Prosecu'tor' 5 Office or maintained-by Defense Counsel pursuant to the terms
'-
1 '
*
1-
.herei'n. . .
'
1'0. That Counsel for the Defendant shall be responsible to ensure that all persons .
iI";
g
" _

'iilfld'w'i 'That the written documents/records provided by the State with the discovery
'
'
IT IS so ORDERED this Jlday of February, 2023.
Fr ces Gull, Special Judge .
C 011 Circuit Court
Copy2' 'State'
, "Roui '
5
3
Baldwin ad}:
, -
_
STATE OF INDIANA ) IN THE CARROLL CIRCUIT COIRT
)SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL) CAUSE NO. 0:8C01-2210-MR-1
STATE OF INDIANA, )
Plaintiff, )
)
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN, )
Defendant. )
Defendant with Attorneys Bradley Rozzi and Andrew Baldwin. State by Prosecuting Attorney Nicholas
McLeland. With consent of the parties, hearing on Defendant's Motion to Continue Bail Hearing and Jury Trial
conducted via Zoom.
Court grants Defendant's Motion to Continue Bail Hearing and resets the hearing to June 15-16, 2023, at
8:30 a.m. in the Carroll Circuit Court. Jury trial also continued to be reset at the bond/omni hearing June 15,
2023. CR 4 time chargeable to Defendant.
State's Motion for Protective Order granted under separate order without objection by Defendant.
Media Intervenors' Renewed Motion to Intervene and Motion to Grant Public Access to State's Verified
the State and Defendant

Request to Prohibit Public Access granted without hearing and without objection from
under separate order.

Fr noes C. Gufitgpecial Judge
Ca oll Circuit Court
'
NOTICE 'l'O BE GIVEN BY: XX COURT __CLERK OTHER
PROOF 0F NOTICE UNDER TRIM. RULE 72(1))

A copy ol' this entry was served either by mail to the address ol' record, deposited in the attorney's distribution hex, or personally distributed to the following
persons:
-

-
Prosecuting Attomey Nicholas MeLcland

Court File
DATED:
)SS:
STATE OF INDIANA, )
Plaintiff, )
)
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN, )
Defendant. )
On November 3, 2022, the Judge of the Carroll Circuit Court, at the request of the Carroll County
Sheriff, entered the following order:
"Accordingly, pursuant to Ind. Code 35-33-11-1, the Court ORDERS the Sheriff of Carroll County to
transfer Defendant to a facility of the department of correction designated by the commissioner: of the department
as suitable for the confinement of Defendant and provided that Space is available." These types of orders are
referred to as "safe kceper" orders. The Department of Correction has complied with this order.
Consistent with that Order and the "safe keeper" statute, the Department of Correction is authorized to
move the Defendant within the Department of Correction to accommodate his medical and physical needs
pursuant to medical directives by the Department of Correction physicians, psychiatrists, or psychologists.
Dated: April 14, 2023 MQQ\

.'
(
ances C. Gull, Special Judge
arroli Circuit Court
'

NO'I'ICIE'TOBEGIVIENBY: XX COURT'___CI.IERK_ O'l'lIliR
PROOF OF NOTICE UNDIER TRIAL RULE 72(1))

A copy of this of record, deposited in the enemy's distribution box, or personally distributed to the
entry was served either-by mail to the address
following persons:
cc: Bradley Rout Attorney for Defendant

Andrctv Baldwin Attorney for Defendant

Prosecuting Attorney Nicholas MeLcland

Court File
DATED:
lNI'l'lAl. OF PERSON WHO NOTIFIED PARTIES: _
COURT CLERK
)SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL) CAUSE NO. 08C012210-MR1
STATE OF INDIANA, )
Plaintiff, )
)
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN, )
Defendant. )
The Court, having had defendant's Motion to Quash Subpoena under advisement, now grants
the Motion to Quash the Subpoena Duces Tecum directed to Westville Correctional Facility relating to
defendant's mental health records, mental health evaluations and/or exams, medical documentation
and/or medical evaluations. The Motion to Quash the Subpoena Duces Tecum directed to Westville
Correctional Facility regarding audio/video recordings, written observations, recordings, phone calls,
written requests, or other documentation is denied. The Motion to Quash the Subpoena Duces Tecum
directed to CVS Headquarters is denied.
The defense Motion to Reconsider and Request for Due Process Hearing ordered set for hearing
June 15, 2023, at 10:00 a.m. The hearing currently set on defendant's request for bail is ordered
converted to a hearing on defendant's Motion to Suppress.
Dated: May 25, 2023

Fr ncesC. Gull, Special Judge
C rroll Circuit Court
NOTICE TO BE GIVEN BY: XX COURT __

CLERK OTHER

distribution box, or personally distributed to the
A copy of this entry was served either by mail to the address of record, deposited in the attorney's
following persons.
cc: Bradley Rozzi~ Attomey for Defendant
Andrexv Baldwin Attorney for Defendant
Slterifl' of Carroll County
Court File
DATED: 6
Alt'15
CLERK
INITIAL QF PEBSQZE w Hg) N9 I lI IED BARNES; COURT
gr")
)SS:
STATE OF INDIANA, )
Plaintiff, )
)
VS. ) ORDER OR JUDGMENT OF TIE COURT
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN, )
Defendant. )
COURTHOUSE MANAGEIWENT AND DECORUNI ORDER

FOR HEARING JUNE 15, 2023 AT 10:00 A.M. \\i
constitutional rights for due process, to ensure the safety of the parties and the public, and to permit
hearing set for Thursday, June 15, 2023, in the Carroll Circuit Court.
l. The Courthouse will open at 8:00 a.m. All entrances will be closed, except for the
2 All members of the public, including members of the media, are subject to screening by
3. N0 weapons of any kind are permitted in the building, except for on-duty law enforcement
4 Cellular telephones are permitted in the building, but must be powered OFF and unused at
5 No electronic equipment or devices are pennitted in the Carroll Circuit Court.
6 Media personnel are permitted to attend the Court session. NO cameras, electronics, lap
to the First Floor of the Courthouse. The Court requests the media be mindfill that other
disruption to-the offices, personnel, and patrons of those offices.
7 The Media are free to use the public areas outside the Courthouse as long as they do not
Seating in the Carroll Circuit Court is limited. The first row of public seats behind the bar
conclusion of the hearing and the parties have left the Courtroom.
Carroll County, Comthouse Security and Courtroom Security.
other than perpetuatillg the record.
12. At the conclusion of the scheduled hearing on public pending Motions before the Court, the
Court will conduct an ex parte hearing with the Defendant and defense counsel on the Ex
Parte Motion. The State of Indiana and the public are excluded from this portion of the
hearing and will be asked to leave the Courtroom. Court Security will remain and are
ordered to keep that portion of the proceeding confidential.
Dated: June 12, 2023
C
r cesC. Gull, Special
011 Circuit Court
Judge
C 011 County, Indlana
NOTICE T0 BE GIVEN BY: _XX__ CLERK OTHER

#COURT
A copy of this entry was served either by mailto the address of record, deposited in the anomey's distribution box, or personally distributed to the
following persons:
cc: Bradley Rozzi Attomey for Defendant
-


Court File
(9'13' Z3 '
F
DATED:
INITIAL F PERSON WHO NOTIFIED PARTIES: COURT CLERK
)ss:
COUNTY OF CARROLL ) CAUSE NO. o'e'eul siéitta'viitauuvdtil
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
vs. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
ORDER
Comes now the Court and having communicated with the parties on Defendant
Allen's Motion for Order on Continuing Disclosure of Defendant's Mental Healtli
Records, now grants said Motion and orders the Indiana Department of CorrectiOIIs
and/or any other departments, law enforcement agencies, and/or individuals assuming
jurisdiction over the care and the custody'of Richard M. Allen (D/O/B: 9/9/72) to
release to Attorney Bradley A. Rozzi and/or Andrew Baldwin, upon the written request
or either, any and all mental health records associated with Richard M. Allen, without
the necessity of the execution of censents and/or waivers by Defendant Allen or his
agents.
Ordered ju ,Q. [£9 ( 3'03:

'
é
RANCES C. G , SPECIAL
ARROLL CIRCUIT COURT JUDYTE\
ARROLL COUNTY, INDIANA
STATE OF INDIANA. ) IN THE CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT
)SS:
STATE OF INDLANA, )
Plaintiff, )
)
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN, )
Defendant. )
Defendant appears in person and with counsel, Bradley Rozzi and Andrew Baldwin. State by
Prosecuting Attorney Nicholas McLeland.
Court is informed by Counsel that the hearing on defendant's Motion to Suppress needs to be
continued to be reset once defense counsel files its notice of omissions/inaccuracies.
Hearing conducted on defendant's Motion to Reconsider Safekeeping Order. Evidence

and
arguments of counsel taken under advisement.
Defendant's Motion for Temporary Restraining Order on Department of CorrectiOn Use of
Camerasland Request for Preliminary Injunction to pend as the Department of Correction has stopped
remote filming attorney meetings with defendant.
Court grants defendant's Motion for Order on Continuing Disclosure of Defendant's Mental
Health Records under separate order.
Ex Harte Motions heard and concluded. Counsel will submit Ex Parte pleading under seal for
the Court to consider.
Court will issue a separate, detailed order on the sealed pleadings which will be unsealed by
agreement of Counsel.
Jury trial ordered set January 8-26, 2024, with jury selection to be conducted in Allen County,
Indiana, and trial to be conducted in Carroll County, Indiana.
Dated: June 20, 2023 gzLQQ

Fr ces C. Gull, Speclal Judge
C oll Clrcmt Court
011 County, Indiana
NOTICE TO BE GIVEN BY: XX COURT __

CLERK OTHER

A copy of this entry was sewed either by mail to the address of record, deposited in the attorney's distribution box, or personally distributed
to the
following persons:
cc; Bradley Rani Attorney for Defendant



Court File
DATED:
STATE OF INDIANA
CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT E NTE RED
STATE OF INDIANA OCT 2 8 2022
v. CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT
RICHARD M. ALLEN
DOB: 09/09/1972
SSN: xxx-xx-3934 CAUSE No. 08co1-221o-MR-1
ORDER 0N INITIAL HEARING

State of Indiana appears by Nicholas C. McLeland, Prosecuting Attorney. Defendant
appears in person, in custody of the Sheriff of Carroll County, Indiana.

Defendant is advised of his right to counsel and of his constitutional and statutory
rights, the charges against him, and the possible penalties.
Defendant advises the Court he intends to hire private counsel. Defendant is
advised that he must retain counsel within twenty days as there are deadlines associated
with the omnibus hearing, which may be waived if not timely pled.
Pleas of not guilty are entered.
Omnibus hearing is set for January 13, 2023, at 9:00 a.m. and Trial by Jury is set as
a first setting on March 20, 2023, at 9:00 a.m. Defendant is ORDERED and DIRECTED to
appear on said dates. Failure to appear may result in the issuance of a bench warrant.
Pre-Omnibus Order is issued.
State of Indiana requests Defendant be held without bond. The Court now ORDERS
Defendant held without bond pending further hearing.
So ORDERED this 28th day of October, 2022.
Ben]
pc: State: Atty. Nicholas C. McLeland

Defendant: Richard M. Allen c/o Sheriff of Carroll County, Indiana
)SS:
)
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
v. )
)
RICHARD M ALLEN )
ORDER SETTING HEARING ON

PETITION TO LET TO BAIL
Comes now Accused, by counsel, and having filed his Petition to Let to Bail.
And the court having examined the same, and being duly advised in the
premises, now sets this matter for a hearing on __________________________.
Date: ________________
Honorable Special Judge,
Carroll Circuit Court 1
Distribution:
) SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL )
STATE OF INDIANA ) CAUSE NUMBER: 08C01-2210-MR-000 l

)
VS
g
FILED
RICHARD M. ALLEN ) October 28, 2022
VERIFIED RE UEST TO PROHIBIT PUBLIC KA
ACCESS TO A COURT RECORD
Now comes Nicholas C. McLeland, Carroll County Prosecuting Attorney, being first duly
sworn upon his oath, and requests the Court to prohibit public access to the Charging
Information, the Probable Cause Affidavit and other Court documents filed in this cause of
action. In support of said request, the State shows the following:
l. That the public interest will be secured by the sealing of the record;
2. That dissemination of the information contained in the record will create a serious and
imminent danger to the public interest;
3. That any prejudicial effect created by dissemination of the information cannot be avoided
by any reasonable method other than sealing of the record;

4. That there is a substantial probability that sealing of the record will be efi‘ective in
protecting the public interest against the perceived danger;
5. That the public interest will be substantially served by prohibiting access for the reason
that the release of the information might damage an ongoing murder investigation; or;
6. That access or dissemination of the Court Record will create a significant risk of
substantial harm to the requestor, other persons, or the general public.
That now comes the State of Indiana, by Nicholas C. McLeland, Carroll County
Prosecuting Attorney, and requests the Court to prohibit public access to the Charging
Information, the Probable Cause Affidavit and other Court documents. Further the State is
asking the Court to find that remedial benefits to be gained by effectuating the public policy of
the state are outweighed by a preponderance of the evidence for the above referenced reasons
and seal the records involved with this Cause of Action, until further Order of the Court and for
all other just and proper relief in the premises.
Dated this adj”, day of October, 2022.
las C. McL , Atty. #28300-08

Carroll County Prosecuting Attorney
COUNTY OF CARROLL, SS: CAUSE NO. O8C01-2210-MK1
VERIFIED REQUEST TO PROHIBIT PUBLIC

Nicholas C. McLeland, Prosecuting Attorney, being first duly sworn upon his oath,
requests the Court to prohibit public access, and shows the Court that:
1) The public interest will be substantially served by prohibiting access for the reason
that the release of the information might damage an ongoing case; or
2) Access or dissemination of the Court Record will create a significant risk of
I affirm under penalty of perjury as specified by I.C. 35-44.1-2-1, that the foregoing
Dated this 14'" day of April 2023.
5'
[1' If:
t/ (film
/K
r
K.
n
n
/
'
l/IVI'. fluid"! /
('1'
Nicholas C. McLeland, Atty. #2830008

In].
APR l 4 2023
CLERK firm/18777
STATE OF INDIANA CARROLL CIRCIJIT COURT
COUNTY OF CARROLL, SS:
IN THE INVESTIGATION OF CAUSE NO. 08C01-2210-MR-1
CRIB/IE8 COMMITTED
IN CARROLL COUNTY, INDIANA

that the release of the information might damage an ongoing murder investigation; or
I affirm under penalty of perjury as specified by LC. 35-44.1-2-1, that the foregoing
Dated this 20th day of April, 2023.
F LE I
IE/ l"
I WI 2,6//;5v:
APR 20 2023 ,
Nicholas C. McLeland, Atty. #28300-08

'
.
91 4' '-
C "
,
'
* Prosecuting Attorney
CLERK CARQOLLC RCU QUR
STATE 0F INDIANA CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT
COUNTY 0F CARROLL, 'ss:
1N THE INVESTIGATION OF CAUSE NO. 08C01-2210-MR-1
CRIMES COMMITTED

requests the Court to prohibit public access, and Shows the Court that:
I aflirm under penalty ofperjm'y as specified by I.C. 35-44.1-2-1, that the foregoing
Dated this 20'" day of April, 2023.
"l
} i;-
I: [ft/It
F APR 2 0 2023
Nicholas C. McLeIand, Any. #28300-08
COURT
CLERKScixRROLL'CIRCUII
IN THE INVESTIGATION OF CAUSE NO. 08C01-2210-MR-1
CRIMES COMMITTED
APR 2 0 2023
VERIFIED REQUEST TO PROHIBIT PUBLIC .
ofimmfifihfiéwuo
ACCESS To A COURT RECORD CLERK CARROLL'chCUJT COURT
I afirm under penalty of perjury as specified by I.C. 35-44.1-21, that the foregoing
representafions are true.
Dated this 20th day of April, 2023.
M 27'!
J
IN THE INVESTIGATION OF CAUSE No. 08C01-2210-MR-1
CRIMES COMMITTED
,4,
1N CARROLL COUNTY, INDIANA

g"" E
APR 2 0 2023

I affirm under penalty of perjury as specified by LC. 35-44.l-2-l, that the foregoing
Dated this 20* day of April, 2023.
It I
II2
/I /I'-t,, I,
COUNTY 0F CARROLL, ss:
STATE 0F INDIANA CAUSE No. 08C012210MR.1
vs.
g
RICHARD M. ALLEN F g
JUN 1 3 2023
D
enr-
VERIFIED REQUEST To PROHIBIT PUBLIC fimfivm

CLERK CARROLLI CIRCUIT COURT
ACCESS To A COURT RECORD
1) The State makes said request in an effort to remain in compliance with the Order or
Judgement of the Court (Gag Order) entered in this cause on December 2, 2022; and
I affirm under penalty of perjury as specified by I.C. 35-44.1-2-1, that the foregoing
Dated this 13th day of June, 2023.
[/1
MI: («/14

STATE OF INDIANA CAUSE NO. 08C01-2210-MR-1
VS.
RICHARD M. ALLEN EEF

B: . 2.3.
JUN 1 3 2023
VERIFIED REQUEST TO PROIHBIT PUBLIC
wwufl/T/fléém)
ACCESS To A COURT RECORD CLERK CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT
1) The State makes said request in an efi'ort to remain in compliance with the Order or
Judgement of the Court (Gag Order) entered in this cause on December 2, 2022; and
I afiirm under penalty of perjury as specified by I.C. 35-44.1-2-1, that the foregoing
Dated this 13'" day of June, 2023.
n/l: C Mai/f
I

SS: -
COUNTY OF CARROLL DELPHI, INDIANA
STATE OF INDIANA
vs. CAUSE N0. osc01-22'10-MR-01
RICHARD M. ALLEN
PROBABLE CAUSE AFFIDAVIT

35-33-7-2 as a sworn
I, the undersigned afliant, submit the following information pursuant to I. C.
afidavit setting forth the facts and circumstances knownto law enforcement of Carroll County as the
basis for probable cause to arrest without awarrant or to establish probable cause for issuance of an '
arrest warrant for the above named defendant.
That the facts and Circumstances desu'bed below wmrld be sufficient basis to: a person ot'
reasonable caution and prudence to believe that the accused has committed or attempted to commit the
be authorized under LC.

ofi'ense(s) described and that if arrested without a warrant, such would
35-33-1-1.
That the hearsay: statements of witnesses conteined herein are considered reliable and credible due to
thewimess's-personal knowledge and/or; are corroborated by the totality ofthe circumstances.
flat on February "14'", 2017 Victim 1. and Victim 2 Werefund deceased in the woods
approximately 0.2 miles northeast ofthe Mount: High Bridge in Carroll Com Their bodies were
located on the north side of the Deer Creek.
At the. time, the Manon High Bridge ma was an approximateiji 1 mile gravel trail terminating at the .
Manon High Bridge. The Manon High Bridge-is an abandoned railroad trestle approximatei}! 0.25 miles
0.7
long spanning theDeer Creek and Deer creek voile}! on the southeast and ofthe trail. Approxirnateijr
miles northwest on the traiifrom the northwestern edge ofthe Manon High Bridge is the Freedom Bridge,
which is a pedestrian bridge spanning State Road 25. Apprma'mateiy 35ofeet west offieedorn Bridge was
afonner railroad overpass aver Old State Road 25 (also known as Count]: Road 300 North). Ihe
trail
terminates just west oftheformer railroad overpass. The majoriw of the trail is in a wooded area with a
'
lof8
I
the location of the girls

steep embankment an the south side of the trail. The entirety of the trail and
bodies were and are located in Carrafl CauntJr, Indiana
and review ofvideo at the Hoosier Harvestore,
. Through interviews, reviews of electronic records,
investigators believe Victim 1 and Victim 2 were dropped of acrossfrom the Mears Farm at1:49p.nr. on
February 139', 2017by -.- fire Mearsfarm is located on the north side of County Road 300 North
A video from Victim 2's phone shows that at2.-13 pan. Victim 1 and Victim
near an entrance to the trails.
ordered the
2 encountered a male subject on the southeastportion of the Manon High Bridge. Elite mole
time. No outgoing communications were
girls "Gigs, Down the hill". No witnesses saw them afler this
201 7.
found on Victim 2.'s phone after this time. Iheir bodies were discovered February'lfl',
on
The video recoveredfronr Victim 2's phone shows Victim 1 walking southeast on the Manon High
her." As the male subject"
Bridge while a male subject wearing a darkjacket andjeans walks behind
Near the end qfthe video male is
approaches Victim 1 and Victim 2, one ofthe victims mentions;l "gun".
"
seen and heard telling the girls, -"Guys, Down the hill Thegirls then begin toproceeddo'wn the hill and
the video ends. A stillphotograph takenfi-om the video and the "Guys, Down the hill" audr'o was
themale.
subsequently released to the public to assist investigators in identifying
Victim 1 and Victim 21s deaths were ruled as homicides. Clothes werefaund in theDeer Creek
located Ihere was also a .40 caliber
belonging to Victim 1 and'Victin'r 2, southqfwhere their bodies were
Victim '1 and Victim 2's bodies. The
unspent round less than twofeet awayfrom Victim 2's body, between
round was unspent and had extraction marks on it.
Interviews were conducted with 3 juveniles, and .-*1hey advised they were on the Manon
on the trail toward Freedom

High Bridge mu on February: 13'", 201 7. They advised they were walking
toward the Manon High
Bridge to go home when they encountered a male walkingfrom Freedom Bridge
Bridge. described the male as "kind of creepy" and advised he was wearing "like blue jeans alike
not really show hisface. "
really light blue jacket and he his hair was gray maybe a little brown and he did
She advised the jacket was a duck canvas tflmjackel advised she said "Hi" to the male but he just
his moutlr. She described

glared at thenr. She recalled him being in all black and had something covering
him as "not very tad" with a bigger build She said he was not bigger than 5'10". advised he was
his hands in his pockets.

wearing a black hoadie, blackjeans, and black boots. She stated he had _
showed investigators photographs she took on her phone while-she was on the trail that day.
lire
20"
J
the Manon High Bridge taken at 12:43 p.m., and another one taken
at
photographs included photo of
advised after she-took the photo of the bench
1:2dp.nr. ofthe bench East ofthe Freedom Bridge.
She advised that was when they encountered the man
they started walking back toward Freedom Bridge.
described the man she
who matched the description of the photograph taken from Victim 2's video.
encountered on the trail as wearing blue or black windbreakerjacket. She advised the jacket had a
he was wearing baggy
collar and he had his head upfront the clothing underneath his jacket. She advised
came up to appraximatebi his shoulder: She advised
jeans and was taller than her: She advised her head
a like he
said "Hi" to the man and that he said nothing back. She stated he was walking with purpose
head down. She
knew where he was going. She'stated he had his 'hands'in his pockets and kqt his
advised she did not get a good look at hisface but believed him to be a white male. Ihe girls
advised after
and the old railroad bridge over

encountering the male they continued their walkacross Freedom Bridge
0id=State Road 25.
Investigators spoke with who advised she was on the trails on Februarjv 130'. 2017. Videoflom
the Hoosier Harveste're captured vehicle traveling eastbound at _I :46pm. toward the entrance across
from the Mearsfarm. advised she saw Jjuvenilefemales walking on the bridge over Old State Road
25 as she was driving underneath on her way tapark. advised there were no other cars parked across
to the Manon High Bridge and observed a

from the Mearsfarrn when she parked She advised she walked
male matching the onefrom Victim 21s video. She described the male she saw-as a white male, wearing
blue jeans and a bluejean jacket. 'She advised he was standing on thefirstplatform of the Manon High
at and continued her
Bridge, approximateb! 5ofeetfrom her. She advised she turned around the bridge
walk. She advised halfivmv between the bridge and the parking area acrossfrom
Mears
approximatelji
She advised she believed the girls were
farm, she passed two girls walking toward Manon High Bridge.
Victim 1 and Victim 2. Video from the Hoosier Harvestore shows at 1:49 pan. white our matching
vehicle traveling awayfrom the entrance acrossfi-om the Mearsfarnt. advised shefinished ha
walk and saw no other adults other than the male on the bridge. Her vehicle is seen on Hoosier
Harvestore video at 2:14 pan. leaving westboundfrom the trails. advised when she was leaving she
noted vehicle was parked in an odd manner at the old Child Protective Services building. She said it was
not oddfor vehicles to be parked there but she noticed it was odd because ofthe manner it was parked,
backed in near the building. Investigators received a tip from in which he stated he was on his way
3of8
to Delphi on State Road 25 around 2:10p.nr. on February 13'", 201 7. He observed a purple PT Cruiser or
a small SUV {we vehicle parked on the south side of the old CPS building. He stated it appeared as ..
both drew diagrams ofwhere

though it was backed in as to conceal the license plate ofthe vehicle.
they mm the vehicle parked and their diagrams generally matched

as to the area the vehicle was parked
and the manner in which it was parked. advised he remembered seeing a smaller dark colored
a car. vehicle is
carparked at the old CPS building. He described it as possibly! being "smart"
seen leaving at 2:28 p.m. on the Hoosier Harvestore video.
Investigators spoke with , who stated that she was traveling East on 300 North on February!
13", 2022 and observed a male subject walking west,- on the North side of300 North, awayfrom the
Manon High Bridge. advised that the male subject was wearing a blue coloredjacket and blue jeans
and was muddy and bloody. Shefurther stateti, that it appeared he had gotten into afight. Investigators
'
,were able to determine from watchingthe .videofrom the Hoosier Harvestore that was
traveling on C?! 300 North at approximately 3:57_p.nr.
Through interviews, electronic data, photographs, ami- videofrom the Hoosiér Harvestore investigators
determined that there were other people on the trail that day after 2:13 p.nr. Hose people were
interviewed and none ofthose individuals encountered the male subject referenced above, witnessed by the
juvenile girls, and . Further none ofthase individuals' witnessed Victim 1 and
Victim 2.
Investigators reviewing prior tips encountered a up narrativefrom an oflicer who interviewed Richard
M Aden in 201 7. Ilhat narrative stated:
Mn Allen was on the trail between 1330-1530. He parked at the old Farm Bureau building
and walked to the new E'eedorn Bridge. While at the Freedom Bridge he saw threefemales.
He noted one was taller and had brown or black hair. He did not remember descrytian nor
did he speak with th ern. He walkedfrom the fieedom Bridge to the High Bridge. He did not
see anybody, although he stated he was watching a stock ticker on his phone as he walked.
He stated there were vehicles parked at the High Bridge trail head, however did notpay
His cellphone did not list an IMEI but did have thefollowing:
MID-256 691 463 100 153 495
steamers-990024 7025 797
Potentialfollow up information.- Who were the three girls walking in the area ofFreedom -
Bridge?
Investigators believe Mr. Allen was referring to theformer Child Protective Services building as there
4of8
believe thefemales he saw
was not Farm Bureau building in the area nor had there been. Investigators
included and due to the time they were leaving the trail,. the time he reported getting to
the trail, and the descr'qrtions the threefemales gave

vehicles in 2017 a 2016 black Ford Focus and a
Investigators discovered Richard Allen owned two
Focus on the
2006 grit}; Ford 500. Investigators observed a vehicle that resembled Adonis 2016 Ford
the Hoosier
Hoosier Harvestore video at 1 :27pm traveling westbound on CR 300 North infront of
Harvestore, which coincided with his statement that he arrived around

1:30 port. at the trails.
Investigators note witnesses described the vehicle parked

at theforrner Child Protective Services Building
as PT Cruiser; small SW or "Snmrt" can Investigators believe-those descriptions are similar in nature
to a 2016 Ford Focus.
On October 13", 2022 Richard Allen was interviewed again by investigators. He advised he was on the
trails on February; 13'", 2017. He stated he sawjuveniie girls on the trails east offieedom Bridge and I
that he went onto the Manon High Bridge Richard Allen further stated he went out onto the Manon High
out to theflrstplatform on the bridge
Bridge to watch thefish. Later in his statement, he said he walked
He stated he then walked back, saton bench on the trail and then left. He stated he parked his car on
the side of an old building. He told investigators that he was wearirrg blue jeans and a blue or black
Carharttjacket with hood. He advised he may have been wearing some type ofhead covering as well.
Hefurther claimed he sawno one else exceptfor the juvenile girls he saw east ofthe Freedom Bridge
Hetold investigators that he ownsfirearms and they are at-his home .
Richard M. Allen is wife, Kathy Allen, also spoke to investigators. She confirmed that Richard did have
guns and knives at the residence She also stated thatRichard still owns a
On October 13'", 2022, Investigators married a search warrant ofRichardAllen's residence at 1967
North Whiteman Drivle, Delphi, Carroll County, Indiana. Among other items, oflicers locatedjackets,
boots, knives andfirearnis, including a Sig Sauer; Model P226, .40 caliber pistol with serial number U 625
627.
Between October 14'", 2022 and October 19'", 2022 the Indiana State Police Laboratory performed an
a
analysis on Allm's Sig Sauer Model P226. The Laboratory pedormed physical
mmination and
ammunition
classification of thefirearni, function test, barrel nad overall length measurement, testflring,
component characterization, microscopic comparison, and NEW The Laboratory determined the '-
5of8
2's body had been cycled through Richard M. Aden'ls Sig
unspent round located withirr two feet of Victim
Sauer Model P226. Ihe Laboratory remarked.-

An identification opinion is reached when the evidence exhibits an agreement of class
is
characteristics and a sufficient agreement of individual marks. Suflicient agreement
related to the significant duplication of random striated/impressed marks as evidenced by
the correspondence ofa pattern or combination ofpatterns ofsurface contours. The
is in nature, and based on relevant scientific
interpretation of identification subjective
research and the reporting enamineris training and experience.
RichardAllen in 2001.
Investigators then ran theflreartn andfound that theflrearm-was purchased by
with
Richard Allen voluntarily came to the Indiana State Policepost on October 26'", 2022. 'He spoke
to use or borrow the Sig Sauer Model P226flrearm.
investigators and stated th ot-he never allowed anyone
When asked about the unspent bullet, he did not have an agilanation ofwhy the bullet was found between
Victim
the bodies .ofVictim 1 and Victim 2. He again admitted that he was on the trail but denied hnoiving
1 or Victim 2 and denied any involvement in their murders. _
'
Carro'fl Count}; Sheriffs Department Detective has been part ofthe investigation since it
started in 2017. He has had annopportunity to review and examine evidence gathered in this investigation
Allen is
Detective , along with other investigators, believe the evidence gathered shows that Richard
the male subject seen on the video fiom Victim 2's phone whofirrced the victims done: the hill. Further,
'
that the victinzs wereforced down 'the hill byRichardAllen and lead to the location where they were
murdered. .
end
Through the statements and photographs ofthejuvenilefemales and
the statement of ',
were at the southeast edge ofthe trail at 12:43 p. m, east ofFreedom Bridge at 1:26pm., and walked
across theformer railroad overpass over bid State Road 25 after 1:26 pan. and before 1:46p.nt. Ihey
walked the entirety; ofthe trail and observed only one person

an adult male, . vehicle is seen on
Hoosier Harvestore video at 1:46p.nt. and leaving at 2:14 pan. and she stated she aniv saw one adult
male. , and described the male in similar manners, wearing similar clothing,
individual.
leading investigators to believe allfour saw the some male
, and is the some male depicted in the
Investigators believe the mole observed by
male or
videofrom mam 2's phone due to the descriptions ofthe male by thefourfemales matching the
the video. Furthermore, Victim 2's video was taken at 2:13 p.m., and saw only one male while
she was on the trailfior'n approximately 1:46pm to 2:14pm
6of8
'
male seen by , and and the'male seen

Investigators believe Richard Allen was the
to that
in Victim 2's video. RichardAlien told investigators he was on the trailfrom 2:30pm; 3:30p.nt.
day. Videofrom HoosierHarvestore' shows"

a vehicle that matches the descrhtfion ofRichcrdAllen 's
he told investigators he was'
vehicle pmsing at 1 :27p.m. toward theformer CPS building: The clothing
and the clothing descriptions provided
wearing match the clothing of the male in Victim 21s video
. A vehicle matching the description of his 2016 Ford Focus
is seen at or
by , and
around 2:10 p.rn., 2:14pm., and 2:28 pan. at theformer CPS building. Through his
own admissions,
out onto the

RichardAllen walked the trails and eventually hiked to theMonon High Bridge and walked
Manon High Bridge.
A male subject ntatching'RichardAilen'is description was not seen on the trail after 2:13 p.m.
North between 2:30 p.nt. and 4:1l pan.
Investigators identified other individuals on the trails or GR. 300
-
None of those individuals saw a male subject matching the description ofRichard Allen on the trail.
who investigators believe to
Furthermore, RichardAllen stated that he only saw three girls on the trail,
'
be .
2:13 pm. because he was in the

Investigators believe Richard Allen was not seen on the trail after
I
woods with Victim and Victim 2. An unspertt .40 caliber round between the bodies of Victim
1 and
P226.
Victim 2, was forensicalb determined to have been cycled through RichardAllen 's Sig Sauer Model
Ihe Sig Sauer Model P226 wasfound at Richard Allen 's residence and he admitted to awnirlg it.
2001. Richard Aden stated he had not
Investigators were able to determine that he had owned it since
been on that property where the unspent round wasfounii, that he did not know the property owner,
and
that he had no atplanatian as to why around cycled through hisfirearm would be at that location.
Furthermore, he stated that he never allowedanyone to use or borrow the Sig Sauer Model P226.
Investigators believe that. afler the victims were murdered, Richard

Allen returned to his vehicle by
walking down on 300 North. Investigators believe he was seen by walking back to his
vehicle on CR 300 north, with clothes that were muddy and bloody.
the
, along with investigators, believe the statements made by the witnesses because
statements corroborate the timeline of the death the two victims, as well as coincide with the admissions
, and . are similar
made by RichardAilen. Further, the accounts relayed by _
in nature and time stanqts on photographs taken by correspond to the times thejuvenilefemales
i
said they wereon the trail and smv male individual. .
7of8
'

Date: October 27, 2022
STATE OF INDIANA CAUSE NUMBER 08C01-2210-MR01

VS
RICHARD M. ALLEN
19 67 Whiteman Drive,
Delphi, IN 46923
DOB: 919/1972
SSN: XXX-1093934
The Court will please enter the following minutes:

State of Indiana by Nicholas C. McLeland,"Prosecutin Attorneytfiles probable cause affidavit executed
2:
by Tony Liggett and mformation for: Count 1: Murder, :1 elony; and Count Murder, Felony.
at
-
_
The Defendant being in custody, the court determines that probable cause does exist. The Court sets bond
In this matter at -
Initial heating is set at on:
Entry Approved:
Benjamin A. Diener, Judge
'
IslNicholas C. MeLeland
Prosecutin Attom
Attorney 283 00-0
) ss:
COUNTY 0F CARROLL )
STATE 0F INDIANA ) CAUSE NUMBER: osc01-2210-Nm-ooo

)
vs. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
COURT ORDER
Now comes the State of Indiana, by Prosecuting Attorney, Nicholas C. McLeland, filed a
Motion for Order Prohibiting the Parties, Counsel, Law Enforcement Ofiicials, Court Personnel,
Coroner, and Family Members from Disseminating Information or Releasing any Extra-Judicial
Statements by Means of Public Communication.
The Court takes the motion under advisement and sets this matter for a hearing on
. All parties are ordered to appear on said time and date.
SO ORDERED this day of November 2022.

PC:
Defendant: Brad Rozzi
Andrew Baldwin
) ss:
COUNTY 0F CARROLL )
STAI'E 0F INDIANA ) CAUSENUMBER:08C01-2210-MR-00001

)
vs. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
SUBPOENA DUCEs TECUM
TO: Westville Correctional Facility

5501 S. 1100 W.
Westville, IN 46391
Pursuant to Rule 2 of the Indiana Rules of Criminal Procedure, you are hereby directed to
produce the following to counsel for the Carroll Comty Prosecutor, Nicholas C. McLeland, at 101
West Main Skeet, Suite 204, Delphi, Indiana 46923 within thirty (30) days of receipt:
1. All documents requested in the accompanying Request for Production of Documents
to a Non-Party.
2. An executed Afidavit of Custodian or Records (enclosed).
Submitted under my hand as counsel of record, pursuant to T.R. 2, on this QQ-m' day
of April, 2023. Respectfully submitted,
MCMM
Nicholas C. McLeland, #2é3oo-os
The Court finds that the requirements of Omar v. State of Indiana are met and the Request for
Leave is Approved this day of April, 2023.

) SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL )

)
VS. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM

5501 S. 1100 W.
Westville, IN 46391
Pmsuant to Rule 2 of the Indiana Rules of Criminal Procedure, you are hereby directed to
West Main Street, Suite 204, Delphi, Indiana 46923 within thirty (30) days of receipt:
to a Non-Patty.
2. An executed Amdavit of Custodian or Records (enclosed).
Submitted under my hand as counsel of record, pursuant to T.R. 2, on this @127" day
of April, 2023. Respectfufly submitted,
Mac 24W
Nicholas c. #2§300-08
Mchland,

) SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL )

)
VS. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
TO: CVS Headquarters

Attn: Records Department
One CVS Drive
Woonsocket, RI 02895
Pursuant to Rule 2 of the Indiana Rules of Criminal Procedm'e, you are hereby directed to
1. All documents requested in the accompanying Request for Producu'on of Documenm
to a Non-Party.
Submitted under my hand as counsel of record, pursuant to T.R. 2, on this MT" day
of April, 2023. Respectfully submitted,
Mac m1
NichoIas c. McLeland, #2§3oo-os

) SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL )
STATE OF INDIANA ) CAUSE NUIVBER: 08C01-2210-MR-00001

)
VS. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )

5501 S. 1100 W.
Westville, IN 46391
Pursuant to Rule 2 of the Indiana Rules of Criminal Procedm'e, you are hereby directed to
to a Non-Party.
Submitted under my hand as counsel of record, pursuant to T.R. 2, on this 3127'" day
of April, 2023. Respectquy submitted,
Macm/
Nicholas c. McLe1and, #2§3oo-08

) SS:
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
)
Defendant. )
ORDER GRANTING MEDIA INTERVENORS’

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE
The matter before the Court is the Motion for Leave to Intervene filed by Media
Intervenors.1 The Court, having considered the Motion and being duly advised, finds that the
Motion should be and is GRANTED.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED THAT:
(i) The Media Intervenors are granted leave to intervene in the above-captioned
cause for the limited purpose of challenging the State’s Verified Request to
Prohibit Public Access filed on October 28, 2022 and the provisional
exclusion of the Probable Cause Affidavit and Charging Information; and
(ii) The Court will accept and consider the Media Intervenors’ Prehearing Brief
filed on November 21, 2022 and tendered Post-Hearing Brief (attached to
the Motion) in ruling on the State’s Verified Request to Prohibit Public
Access filed on October 28, 2022.
Dated: ____________________ _________________________________

1
The “Media Intervenors” refer to the following entities collectively: Indiana Broadcasters Association, Inc.; Hoosier
Company d/b/a WRTV; Nexstar Media Inc. d/b/a WXIN/WTTV; Neuhoff Media Lafayette, LLC; Woof Boom Radio
LLC; TEGNA Inc. d/b/a WTHR; Gannett Satellite Information Network, LLC d/b/a The Indianapolis Star; and
American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. d/b/a ABC News.
1
)ss:
)
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
v. )
)
RICHARD M ALLEN )
ORDER
Comes now the Court, having reviewed Defendant’s Verified Motion for
Change of Venue from the County filed in the matter, and hereby orders that a
hearing shall be scheduled for _______________________________________
Date: ________________
Honorable Special Judge,
Distribution:
) SS:
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN, )
)
Defendant. )
ORDER GRANTING MEDIA INTERVENORS’ RENEWED MOTION TO INTERVENE

AND MOTION TO GRANT PUBLIC ACCESS
TO THE STATE’S VERIFIED REQUEST TO PROHIBIT PUBLIC ACCESS
The matter before the Court is the Renewed Motion to Intervene and Motion to Grant
Public Access to the State’s Verified Request to Prohibit Public Access filed by the Media
Intervenors (the “Motion”).1 The Court, having considered both Motions and being duly advised,
finds that the Motions should be GRANTED.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED THAT the Media
Intervenors are granted leave to intervene, and the State’s Verified Request to Prohibit Public
Access filed on October 28, 2022 shall be released to the public. The Clerk is directed to make the
Verified Request available to the public on the docket.
Dated: ____________________ _________________________________

1
The “Media Intervenors” refer to the following entities collectively: Indiana Broadcasters Association, Inc.; Hoosier
Company d/b/a WRTV; Nexstar Media Inc. d/b/a WXIN/WTTV; Neuhoff Media Lafayette, LLC; Woof Boom Radio
LLC; TEGNA Inc. d/b/a WTHR; Gannett Satellite Information Network, LLC d/b/a The Indianapolis Star; and
American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. d/b/a ABC News.
1
Filed: 6/8/2023 4:47 PM
STATE OF INDIANA ) IN THE CIRCUIT COURT

) SS:
CARROLL COUNTY ) OF CARROLL COUNTY
STATE OF INDIANA )
V. ) CAUSE NO. 08C01-2210-MR-1

)
RICHARD ALLEN
YERIFIED REQUEST F1 2R A! :1 §E§S TQ

COURT RECORDS EXCLUDED FROM PUBLIC ACCESS
Comes now Intervenor MYSTERY SHEET LLC doing business as MURDER SHEET, by
counsel Kevin Greenlee, and respectfully requests access to court records excluded from public access
pursuant to Ind. Access to Court Records Rule 9(B). In support of this Request, Intervenor provides the
following:
l. On April 28, 2023, a letter was filed with the Court. As of the dating of this filing, this letter
remains confidential.
2. Thereafter, on May 17, 2023, the Defendant filed its Verified Motion for Temporary Restraining
Order and Preliminary Injunction. From the Chronological Case Summary, it appears this Motion
was filed without an Access to Court Records (ACR) Form identifying the specific grounds for
exclusion. See A.C.R. 5(B). Nevertheless, this Motion remains confidential.
3. Afterward, on May 19, 2023, the State filed its Notice of Discovery with the Defendant filing its
Motion to Suppress and Motion to Convert Let Bail Hearing into Suppression Hearing. From the
Chronological Case Summary, it appears these documents were filed without an Access to Court
Records (ACR) Form identifying the specific grounds for exclusion. See A.C.R. 5(B). However,
these documents also remain confidential.
4. Intervenor seeks access to the letter filed on April 28, 2023; the Verified Motion for Temporary
Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction; Notice of Discovery; Motion to Suppression; and,
Motion to Convert Let Bail Hearing into Suppression Hearing as the records should not be
excluded for Public Access under A.C.R. 5(A), (B), (C), (D), or (E). See A.C.R. 9(B)(l)(e).
a. From the Chronological Case Summary, it appears A.C.R. 5(A), (C), (D) and (E) are
inapplicable. Likewise, A.C.R. 5(B) is inapplicable as an ACR Forrn was not filed with
the records Intervenor requests access to.
b. Additionally, these records were not subjected to exclusion pursuant to A.C.R. 6.
Similarly, these records were not subjected to seal pursuant to Ind. Code § 5-14-3-5.5.
c. Moreover, pursuant to A.C.R. 9(B)(1), this request is verified and reduced to writing.
d. Finally, the objective of these rules is to "provide maximum public accessibility to [c]ou1t
[r]ecords[.]" A.C.R. 1, Commentary. In fact, the rules start "from the presumption of
open Public Access to Court Records." Id.
WHEREFORE, Intervenor respectfully requests access to court records excluded from public
access pursuant to Ind. Access to Court Records Rule 9(B)
/s/Kevin Greenlee
9783 E 116th Street #141
Fishers, IN 46037
kevingreenlee@gmail.com
VERIFICATION
I affirm, under the penalties for perjury, the foregoing information is true and correct to
the best of my knowledge.
Kevin Greenlee
/s/
9783 E 116th Street #141
Fishers, IN 46037
kevingreenlee@gmail.com
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served on the State of Indiana, by
eSerVice, on the date of filing.
/s/KeVin Greenlee
)ss:
COUNTYOFCARROLL )
STATE 0F INDIANA ) CAUSE NUMBER: 08C0 -
) lo-éWR-émooE
'vs. )
) APR 1 4 2023
I::,
RICHARD M. ALLEN ) _
5%mmijqwammg
STATE'S RESPONSE TO DEFENSE'S EMERGENCY MOTION TO MODIFY
SAFEKEEPING ORDER
respectfully files its response to the Defendant's Emergency Motion to Modify Safekeeping
Order and would ask the Court to consider the following:
1. That charges were filed against the Defendant, Richard Allen, on October 28th,
2022, for 2 counts of Murder, in violation of I.C. 35-42-1-1(2).

2 That the Carroll County Sherist Department filed a Request by the Sheriff of
Carroll County, Indiana to Transfer Inmate from the Custody of the Sheriff to the
Custody of the Indiana Department or Corrections for Safekeeping on November

3rd, 2022.
3 That said request was granted and the Defendant was ordered to the safekeeping
of the Indiana Department of Corrections.
4 That the Defendant is currently incarcerated in the Westville Correctional
Facility, where he is housed in the segregation unit for his protection.

5 That the Defendant is being seen on a regular basis by medical personnel and
mental health providers.
6 That the Defendant is being treated the same as other detainees at the facility. In
fact, he has more amenities than other convicted inmates in that unit.
7 That the allegations in the Defendant's motion, while colorful and dramatic, are
not entirely correct.
8 That the State had a meeting with the Warden of Westville Correctional Facility,
John Galipeau, on April 6m, 2023 and the allegations in the motion by the Defense
are false, as evidenced by the attached affidavit marked as State's Exhibit "1".
9 That the Defendant is afforded the same amount of rec time as the other inmates
and has been using that rec time to exercise.
10. That it is true that the Defense dropped off paperwork for the Defendant to review
and the facility did hang on to the paperwork until they heard from the Defense
attorneys as to how the paperwork should be handled.

11. That representatives from the facility attempted to contact Defense counsel for
several days in a row to determine if the paperwork should be given to the
Defendant in his cell or the Defendant should be brought to a different location to
review the paperwork.
12. That the Defendant is isolated for his protection and would be isolated if he were
moved to another facility.
13. That the State, through investigators, has made contact with the Cass County
Sheriff and he would state the following:
a That he is willing to house the Defendant in the Cass County Jail.
b. That if the Defendant is moved to the Cass County Jail, he will be housed
in the segregated unit in a 7 X 12 cell, with a roll matt and 2 bunks.
c. That the Defendant is likely to be on suicide watch which means he will
not be allowed face to face Visits or any rec time. That he will be confined
to his cell at all times.
d. That if he is not on suicide watch, he will only have Video visits and
limited rec time.
e. That the Defendant will have the same amenities as he has now in the
Department of Corrections.
f. That the Cass County Jail does not have a mental health team to address
any mental health needs.
g. That the Cass County Sheriff's Department is not willing to transport the
Defendant for trial or for other hearings.
14. That the Carroll County Sheriff's Department does not have the manpower to
transport the Defendant.

15. That the Carroll County Jail does not have mental health counselors or
counseling, whereas the Department of Corrections has those resources available
for the well being of the Defendant.
16. That the State believes that the current status of Defendant's mental health is due
to the status of the case, not due to the location of his incarceration.
l7. That the photo taken by Defense was taken immediately after the Defendant
returned from his rec time. The shirt he is wearing in the photo is the same shirt
that he wears to rec time each time he goes. He had clean shirts in his cell at the
time of the photo, but Defense chose to photograph him in his dirty shirt in order
to curry sympathy in the public eye for the Defendant.
18. That the Defendant has lost weight since he has been incarcerated, but he has
been evaluated and examined by medical personnel at the facility and his BMI is
on target for a man his age at his weight and medical staff classify him as very
healthy.
19. That the facility that the Defendant is placed in is not casually referred to as
"death row".
20. That the Defendant is in no way being treated less fairly than anyone else in that
facility. He certainly is not being treated less fairly than a convicted person in
that facility.
21. That the colorful, dramatic language used by the Defense was an attempt to curry
public favor for their client and try this matter in the public instead of in the
courtroom.
22. That many of the statements in Defense's motion violate the "gag" Order put in
place by the Court.

23. That the State has no opinion on where the Defendant should be housed awaiting
trial, but the State does take offense to the irresponsible allegations of the Defense
in their motion.
24. That the State has no objection to the Defendant being moved to a facility within
the Department of Corrections that is better suited to address his mental health
needs.
25. That the Defendant's current placement at Westville Correctional Facility is not a
violation of his civil liberties.
26. That the Carroll County Sheriffs Department declined the request of Defense to
move the Defendant because the Carroll County Sheriff's Department does not
have the manpower to transport the Defendant.
27. That the Department of Corrections is more equipped to transport the Defendant
back and forth to court dates in order to keep the Defendant safe and ensure that
he makes it to all future hearings.
28. That the State has been made aware that the Defendant is being evaluated at 10:00
A.M. on April 14'", 2023 to assess his mental health needs and the State believes
it is important to see the result of that testing before a decision is made.

McLeland, and files their response to the Defendant's Emergency Motion to Modify Safekeeping
Order and would ask the court to consider the same when making it's decision and for all other
just and proper relief in the premises.
Ml: C M«11/y
Itlicholas C. McLeland
Attorney #28300-08
record, through personally delivery, ordinary mail with proper postage affixed or by service through the efiling system
and filed with Carroll Circuit Court, this _l4'h day of April, 2023.
_
Mcmw
Attorney #28300-08
AFFIDAVIT
John Galipeau, the acting Warden of Westville Correctional Facility, whicli is part of the 3;
Indiana Department of Corrections, affimis and swears to the following:

l. That the Defendant, Richard Allen, is housed in the Westville Correctional Facility in
the segregation unit.
That the Defendant is housed in that unit for his protection. l
That the cell that the Defendant is housed in is a 12 X 8 cell which is the standard size
cell in that facility.
4 That the Defendant has a bed with a mattress and the mattress is the same mattress
that all the inmates receive at that facility.
That there is a bed fi'ame but that it is attached to the floor in order to protect the
Defendant from harmiiig himself.
6 That the Defendant is in that type of cell for his protection and because he has made
suicidal statements and could attempt to harm himself.
7 That the Defendant is offered time to shower 3 times a week, which is the same
amount as all the other inmates in that facility.
That the Defendant is provided with 3 sets of clothing per week, which is the same as
all the other inmates in that facility.
9 That the Defendant has been afforded connnissary privileges and has extra shirts and
shoes in his cell that he is not wearing.
10. That the Defendant is not required to wear the same clothes, and underwear for days
and days on end that are soiled, stained, tattered and tom. 1
11. That the Defendant has equal access to clean clothing just like all the other inmates in
that facility. :
12. That the Defendant was afforded the use of an electronic tablet where he can make
calls, send texts and download music, which is an amenity that the other inmates do .
not have, and he broke it.

13. That the Defendant is afforded the same recreation time as all the other inmates in
that facility, which is Monday, Wednesday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday.
14. That the Defendant is regularly seen by medical personal and mental health
counselors to assess his health and well-being.
15. That the Defendant is not afforded face to face visitations due to being in the
segregation unit.
l swear, under penalty of peijury, as specified by IC 35-44-2-1, that the foregoing representations
Signe d /7/
are tine and accurate to the best of my knowledge
alip,Wa1déli/
Ostville Correctional Facility
Sin the
thtana éupreme QEuurt
STATE OF INDIANA FILED
Supreme Court Case No.
ZZS-SJ-369 Nov 03 2022, 5:32 pm
v s. CLERK
Trial Court Case No.
RICHARD M. ALLEN 08C01-2210-MR-1
Order Appointing Special Judge

The Honorable Benjamin A. Diener, Judge of the Carroll Circuit Court, on his own
motion, recuses himself and certifies this matter to the Court for appointment of a special
judge.
And this Court, being duly advised, now finds that a special judge should be appointed
to hear this matter in the Carroll Circuit Court pursuant to Indiana Criminal Procedure
Rule 13(D).
IT IS, THEREFORE, FURTHER ORDERED that the Honorable Frances C. Gull, is
appointed as special judge to hear this matter in the Carroll Circuit Court. This order vests
jurisdiction in Judge Gull. Pursuant to Indiana Criminal Procedure Rule 13(E), an oath of
office is not required.
. . . 11/ 3 / 2022
Done at Indlanapolls, Indrana, on
Loretta H. Rush
Chief Justice of Indiana
ENTERED
Nov, 0 4 2022

Filed: 1/12/2023 12:12 PM

) ss:
COUNTY 0F CARROLL
STATE 0F INDIANA ) CAUSE NUMBER: 08C01-2210-1vJR-00001

)
vs. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
STATE'S RESPONSE TO SUPPLEMENTAL. MOTION FOR DISCOVERYQW'I)

REQUEST FOR RULE 404 AND 405 EVIDENCE
respectfully files it's response to the Defendant's Supplemental Motion for Discovery and
Request for Rule 404 and 405 Evidence. The State's responses to the numbered requests are as
follows:
l. Discovery is automatic per the'Carroll County Local Rules and this information
will be forwarded to the defense as part of discovery.
2. This information will be forwarded to the Defense as part of discovery per local
rule.
rule.
rule.
rule.
6. At this time no promises have been made by the State to any witnesses.
rule.
There was not a grand jury held in relation to this matter.
r9. Any statements made by witnesses and/or the Defendant will be forwarded to the
Defense as part of discovery per local rule. The State does not intend to draft a
summary of those statements or give the Defense a summary of the State's

opinions or thoughts about those statements. Those statements will be provided
to the Defense in their entirety. The Defense seems to be asking the State to do
their work for them and formulate a defense for them. The State objects to the
Defense's requests that the State draft a separate summary of those statements.
10. Any telephone calls made by the Defendant will be turned over to the Defense as
part of discovery per local rule. The State objects to drafting a memorandum of
the conversation. Again, the State incorporates the response to Number 9 into this
response. If there are transcripts of the phone calls, the State will produce those
as part of discovery per the local rule.
rule.
rule.
13. The State objects to providing criminal records for the Defenses witness lists, in
that the State does not even know who is going to be on their witness list. If the
Defense requests criminal records of specific people, the State is happy to assist in
gathering those records.

rule.
rule.
rule.
17. The State objects to said request by the Defense. Any information that the State
has pertaining to the case will be forwarded to the Defense as part of discovery,
both exculpatory and inculpatory. A memorandum explaining those is outside the
scope of discovery. The Defendant's request is essentially an interrogatory asking
the State to divulge its legal analysis or impressions of the case and assist the
Defense in assembling its evidence, which is barred by State ex rel. Grammer v.
Tippecanoe Circuit Court, 377 N.E.2d 1359, 1364-65 (Ind. 1978).

rule.
rule.
rule.
21. The State objects to this request by the Defense. TR 34 states that a request for
production has to be for items in the possession, custody or control of the party
upon whom the request is served. TR 26(B)(1) goes on to state that the Court can
limit discovery if the information is obtainable fiom some other source that is
more convenient, less burdensome or less expensive. The State of Indiana is not
in possession of the information that the Defense is requesting, nor was the State a
party to any lawsuits filed against the Carroll County Sheriff's Department, Tobe
Leazenby, Tony Liggett or Michael Thomas. To impose of the State to have to
track all these items down is unreasonably burdensome. In addition, it is the
State's belief that this request goes beyond the scope of discovery. There is no
reason that the State is aware of where this information would be relevant in any
way to the investigation or prosecution of the Defendant.

22. The State objects to this request. Please incorporate the State's response in
number 21 to this response.
23. The State objects to this request. Please incorporate the State's response in
number 21 to this response.
rule.
rule.
26. State objects to said request. If the State choses to use any evidence that would
fall under Indiana Rules of Evidence Rule 404(b), the State will file notice with
the Court per the rule. Further, the request by the defendant must be "reasonably
understandable and sufficiently clear" to alert the prosecution that the defendant is
requesting pre-trial notification. Abdul-Musawwir v. State, 674 N.E.2d 972, 975

(Ind. Ct. App. 1996). This request is neither reasonably understandable or
sufficiently clear. The request seems to be a blanket request for any and all
evidence that may be out there for the Defendant and any defense witnesses,
which they have yet to name. Nor has the Defense asserted any kind of
affirmative defense to put the State on notice that character evidence may be at
issue.
27. State objects to said request. Please incorporate the State's response in number 26
to this response.
28. The State objects to this request. Per Indiana Rule of Evidence Rule 405, the
defense must first notify the State that they intend to introduce admissible
character evidence and what that evidence is going to be before the State is
obligated to disclose what character evidence will be used on behalf of the State.
The Defense has yet to provide any kind of pretrial notice to the State to require a
response.
29. The State objects to this request. Any information produced by the State would
be considered work product and exempt from discovery.

McLeland, and files their response to the Defendant's request and ask the Court to take no action
in part and then deny in part the request fiom the Defense and for all other just and proper relief
in the premises.
fl/nrc 247M
v
Attorney #2830008
record, through personally delivery, ordinary mail with proper postage affixed or by service through the efiling system
and filed with Carroll Circuit Court, this _12th day of January, 202 .
_
arc "7M
Attorney #28300-08
Filed: 1/20/2023 4:37 PM

)ss:
COUNTY OF CARROLL ) CAUSE N0. 08C01-2210MR-000001
STA'I'E OF INDIANA
)
VS.
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
STIPULATION REGARDING DEFENDANTIS VERIFIED MOTION

FOR CHANGEVOF VENIIE FROM THE COUNTY
Comes now the State oflndima, by Pro'secutor, Nicholas C. Meleland, the Defendant,
Richard Allen, by Attorneys, Bradley A. Rozzi and Andrew 1. Baldwin, and the parties having
reached a partial agreement on Defendant's Verified Motion for Change of Venue from the
County file-marked November 28, 2022, now agree and stipulate as follows:
I. On November 28, 2022, Defendant Allen filed his Verified Motion for Change of
Venue from the County. Said Motion was set for hearhtg on Friday, January 13, 2023;
2. On Friday, January 13, 2023, the parties convened, in chambers, and reached a partial
agreement on said Motion;

3. The parties stipulated that Defendant's request for change of venue woxrld be denied
and that all fixrther Court proceedings, not involviltg the jury selection process, would take place
inthe County ofCarroll, Stateoflndianagmlessotherwiseorderedbythe Court;
4. Pursuant to LC. 3566-6416:), the parties fiarther agree that the jury venire shall be
drawn from either St. Joseph County, Indiana or Allen County, Indiana, with the mderstanding
that hot}: parties acquiesce in the Court exercising its discretion in selecting one of the two
referenced counties fiom which the jury venire shall be dravvn and within which the jury shall be
selected; and
5. Upon the Court issuing an Order regardingthe same, ther . vies shall be bound
'
:11 until furtl'lerorderoftl'le Court.
olas C. Mc
Prosecutor, Carroll
.Ba m#17ssl=¢r
Counse for fondant
STATE OF WDIANA ) IN THE CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT
) SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL )

)
VS. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
F
L
Indiana Department of Corrections E

5501 8.1100 W. APR 2 0 2023
Westville, IN 46391
CLERK%QE¥§SI7EZ?$éELT€COURT
RE: Richard Allen
Now comes the State of Indiana, by Prosecuting Attorney, Nicholas C. McLeland, pursuant
to Rule 2 of the Indiana Trial Rules of Trial of Criminal Procedure, requests that the following
documents and records be produced for the Carroll Comty Prosecuting Attorney Nicholas C.
McLeland, at 101 West Main Street, Suite 204, Delphi, Indiana 46923, within thirty (30) days fiom
the date of service of this Request for Production of Documents and Records to a Non-Party. You
may comply by mailing a copy of the requested documents to the Prosecutor's ofice post-marked
prior to the date on which production is required by the Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure.
DEFINITIONS
As used in this request, the term "document" encompasses the full scope of that term as it is
used in Trial Rule 34, including, without limitations, all writings, papers, photographs, videos, and
other recordings and communications of any find, whether printed, electronically recorded, filmed,
or recorded or produced manually or by other process. The term "document" includes all margin
comments, handwritten notes, date of receipt stamps and notations of any h'nd appearing on any
document. The term "document" includes all files and data stored on computer disks or hard drives,
all files and data stored on any computer databases.
For each document produced, identify the corresponding request. Ifyou claim any
information sought herein is privileged in whole or in part, object to any form of any request or
believe that any document would be excluded fi'om production to the State, regardless of its
relevance, state the reason(s) for said obj ection or ground of exclusion. Identify with particularity
each document for which you claim a privilege including the date of the document, the person who
prepared the document, the person to whom the document was directed, the substance of the
document and the reason you believe the document is privileged.
INSTRUCTIONS
This Request for Production of Documents and Records to a Non-Party is made pursuant to
Rule 2 of the Indiana Rules of Criminal Procedure. In accordance with that Rule:
1. You are entitled to reimbm'sement for costs resulting fi'om your response to this
Request for Producfion of Documents and Records to Non-Party. If there are costs
associated with production of these documents, please let me ofice know and we
will reimburse for those costs.
2. You are entitled to security against damages, or payment of damages, which may
result fi'om this request, and you may respond to this Request for Production of
Documents to a Non-Party by submitting to its terms, or by proposing difi'erent
terms, or by objecting specifically or generally to the Request by serving a written
response to the Prosecuting Attorney, Nicholas C. McLeland, within thirty (30) days
fiom the receipt of the Request for Production of Docmnents and Records to a Non-
Party, or by moving to Quash this Request for Production of Documents and
Records to a Non-Party, as permitted by Rule 2 of the Indiana Rules of Criminal
Procedure.
3 The failure to respond to this Request for Production of Documents and Records to a
Non- Party, to object to it, or to move to quash it, as provided by the applicable
Indiana Rules of Criminal Procedure or Order of the Court, within thirty (30) days
fiom the date of service, will subject you to a Motion for Sancu'ons pursuant to Rule
2 of the Indiana Rules of Criminal Procedure.
4 You are required to keep this subpoena and the information contained therein
confidential. This subpoena and the informafion listed herein is not to be released to
the public and should be kept confidential. Any release of this informafion will be in
direct violation of a Court Order.
DOCUMENTS AND RECORDS TO BE PRODUCED
l Any mental health records that you may have concerning Richard M. Allen,
including all records fiom any physician that has evaluated or examined Richard
M. Allen fiom the beginning of his stay at Westville Correctional Facility, on or
about November 3", 2022 until present.
2 The results of any mental health evaluation and/or exams performed on Richard
M. Allen while he has been incarcerated at Westville Correctional Facility, on or
about November 3'", 2022 until present.
3 Any other documents, records, notes, videos and/or writings that the facility may
have pertaining to Richard M. Allen mental health during his time of
incarceration at Westville Correctional Facility, on or about November 3", 2022 ,

until present.
Submitted Imder my hand as counsel of record, pursuant to TR. 2, on this 207"

, day of
April, 2023.
Respectquy submitted,
MMW
Nicholas C. McLeland, #28300-08
101 W. Main Street
Delphi, IN 46923
(765) 564-4514
pm
I hereby certify that service of a true and complete copy of the above and foregoing pleading or was made upon the
following parties and filed with the Carroll Circuit Court by depositing the same in the United States mail in an
envelope properly addressed and with suficient postage afiixed this all?» day of April, 2023.

5501 S. 1100 W.
Westville, IN 46391
MMW/'
28300-08
) SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL )
STATE OF INDIANA ) CAUSE NUIvIBER: 08C01-2210-MR-00001

)
VS. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
TO: Westville Correctional Facility is a

pm:
Indiana Department of Corrections E is a4

'
'
5501 S. 1100 W. APR 20 2023

Westville, IN 46391 ,'l r) /'. ,-
,'
/ // may, M'Q
CLERKTZARROLL'CTRCUIT COURT
RE: Richard Allen
documents and records be produced for the Carroll County Prosecuting Attorney Nicholas C.
McLeIand, at 101 West Main Street, Suite 204, Delphi, Indiana 46923, within thirty (30) days from
may comply by mailing a copy of the requested documents to the Prosecutor's oflice post-marked
DEFINITIONS
As used in this request, the term "document" encompasses the fiJII scope of that term as it is
other recordings and communications of any kind, whether printed, electronically recorded, filmed,
comments, handwritten notes, date of receipt stamps and notafions of any kind appearing on any
believe that any document would be excluded fiom production to the State, regardless of its
relevance, state the reason(s) for said obj ecfion or ground of exclusion. Identify with particularity
INSTRUCTIONS
1. You are entitled to reimbursement for costs resulting fi'om your response to this
Request for Production of Documents and Records to Non-Party. Ifthere are costs
result fiom this request, and you may respond to this Request for Production of
Documents to a Non-Party by submitting to its terms, or by proposing difiermt
fi'om the receipt of the Request for Production of Documents and Records to a Non-
Party, or by moving to Quash this Request for Producfion of Documents and
Procedure.
3 The failure to respond to this Request for Production of Documents and Records to a
fi'om the date of service, will subject you to a Motion for Sanctions pursuant to Rule
confidential. This subpoena and the information listed herein is not to be released to
the public and should be kept confidential. Any release of this information will be in
DOCUMENTS AND RECORDS T0 BE PRODUCED
l Any medical documents that you may have concerning Richard M. Allen,
including all records fiom any physician that has evaluated or examined Richard
M. Allen fi'om the beginning of his stay at Westville Correctional Facility, on or
about November 3", 2022 until present.
2 The results of any medical evaluation performed on Richard M. Allen while he
has been incarcerated at Westville Correctional Facility, on or about November
3rd, 2022 until present.
Any other documents, records, notes, videos and/or writings that the facility may
have pertaining to Richard M. Allen medical health. during his time of
incarceration at Westville Correctional Facility, on or about November 3", 2022 ,

until present.
Submitted under my hand as counsel of record, pursuant to TR. 2, on this so?!" day of
April, 2023.
MCMM
101 W. Main Street
Delphi, IN 46923
(765) 5644514
Ihereby certifythat service ofatrue and complete copyofflie above andforegoingpleading orpaperwas madeuponthe
following parties and filed with the Carroll Circuit Court by the same in the United States mail in an
envelope properly addressed and with suflicient postage affixed this 2&7" day of April, 2023.
depositingT

5501 S. 1100 W.
Westville, IN 46391
fl/ccmmr
28300-08
STATE OF INDIANA ) 1N THE CARROLL CRCUIT COURT
) SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL )

)
VS. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )

SUBPOENA DUCEs TECUM
F E
APR 2 0 2023
,
One CVS Drive 9' me L

7x!
woonsockegmozggs CLERK CARROLL C1RCULT COURT
RE: Richard Allen
documents and records be produced for the Carroll Cotmty Prosecuting Attorney Nicholas C.
McLeland, at lOl West Main Street, Suite 204, Delphi, Indiana 46923, within thirty (30) days fi'om
prior to the date on which production is required by the Indiana Rules of Trial Procedm'e.
DEFINITIONS
As used in this request, the term "document" encompasses the fiill scope ofthat term as it is
used in Trial Rule 34, including, without limitations, all wrifings, papers, photographs, videos, and
other recordings and communican'ons of any h'nd, whether printed, electronically recorded, filmed,
comments, handwritten notes, date of receipt stamps and notations of any kind appearing on any
document. The term "document" includes all files and data stored on computer disks or hard dn'ves,
believe that any document would be excluded fiom production to the State, regardless of its
relevance, state the reason(s) for said objection or gomd of exclusion. Identify with particulm'ity
INSTRUCTIONS
1. You are entitled to reimbursement for costs resulting fiom your response to this
Request for Production of Documents and Records to Non-Party. Ifthere are costs
2. You are entifled to security against damages, or payment of damages, which may
result fiom this request, and you may respond to this Request for Production of
Documenm to a Non-Party by submitting to its terms, or by proposing diflermt
fiom the receipt of the Request for Production of Documents and Records to a Non-

Procedure.
3. The failure to respond to this Request for Production of Documents and Records to a
Non Party, to object to it, or to move to quash it, as provided by the applicable
fiom the date of service, will subject you to a Motion for Sanctions pursuant to Rule
4. You are required to keep this subpoena and the infonnation contained therein
the public and should be kept confidential. Any release of this infonnation will be in
DOCUMENTS AND RECORDS TO BE PRODUCED
l. The work records for Richard Allen.
2. Please provide copies of all work records for Richard Allen, including attendance
records for those days.
3. Personal files for Richard Allen
Submitted under my hand as counsel of record, pursuant to T.R. 2, on this £91 day of
April, 2023.
MCMM
101 W. Main Street
Delphi, IN 46923
(765) 564-4514
Ihereby certify that service of a true and complete copy of the above and foregoing pleading or paper was made upon the
following parties and filed with the Carroll Circuit Court by the same in the Un'md States mail In an
depositing'T
envelope properly addressed and with suflicierit postage aflixed this 207"day of April, 2023.
CVS Headquarters
One cvs Drive
Woonsocket, RI 02895
( m
28300-08
) SS:
COUNTY OF CARROLL )

)
VS. )
)
RICHARD M. ALLEN )
T0: Westville Correctional Facility

E E
Attn: Elise Gallagher APR 2 0 2023
5501 S. 1100 W.
Westville, IN 46391 fiwflfjflm
RE: Richard Allen
documents and records be produced for the Carroll County Prosecuting Attorney Nicholas C.
McLeland, at 101 West Main Street, Suite 204, Delphi, Indiana 46923, within thirty (30) days fiom
DEFINITIONS
As used in this request, the term "document" encompasses the full scope of that term as it is
other recordings and commlmications of any h'nd, whether printed, electronically recorded, filmed,
comments, handwritten notes, date of receipt stamps and notafions of any h'nd appearing on any
For each document produced, identify the corresponding request Ifyou claim any
believe that any document would be excluded fi'om production to the State, regardless of its
relevance, state the reason(s) for said objection or ground of exclusion. Identify with particularity
each document for which you claim a privilege including the date of the doc1m1ent, the person who
INSTRUCTIONS
1. You are entitled to reimbursement for costs resulting fiom your response to this
Request for Production of Docmnents and Records to Non-Party. Ifthere are costs
result fiom this request, and you may respond to this Request for Producfion of
Documents to a Non-Party by submitting to its terms, or by proposing difi'erent
response to the Prosecuu'ng Attorney, Nicholas C. McLeland, within thirty (30) days
fiom the receipt of the Request for Production of Documents and Records to a Non-
Procedure.
The failure to respond to this Request for Production of Documents and Records to a
fiom the date of service, will subject you to a Motion for Sancfions pursuant to Rule
the public and should be kept confidential. Any release of this information will be in
DOCUIWENTS AND RECORDS TO BE PRODUCED
1 Any and all audio/video recordings of Richard M. Allen while he is in his cell or
being moved fiom his cell to a recreational area for the time period of his
incarceration at Westville Correctional Facility.
Any notes fiom any guards, inmates or other Westville personnel that have made
written observations of Richard M. Allen, either while he is in his cell or when he
is being moved fi'om one place to another for the time period of his incarceration
at Westville Correctional Facility.
Recordings of any interviews done with Richard M. Allen by anyone at the facility
while he has been incarcerated at Westville Correctional Facility.
4 Copies of any recorded phone calls, outside of phone calls made to his attorneys,
while he was incarcerated in the facility.
5. Any written requests made by Richard M. Allen while he was at Westville
Correctional Facility.
6. Any other documents, records, notes, videos and/or writings that the facility may
have pertaining to Richard M. Allen for his incarceration at that facility.
Submittedlmdermy handas counsel ofrecord, pursuantto TR. 2, onthisMday of

'
April, 2023.
Mccm/
101 W. Main Street
Delphi, 1N 46923
(765) 564-4514
I hereby certify that service of a true and complete copy of the above and foregoing pleading or paper was made upon the
following parties and filed with the Carroll Circuit Court by the same in the United States mail m an
depositingT
envelope properly addressed and with sufficient postage aflixed this 307" day of April, 2023.

Atln: Elise Gallagher
5501 S. 1100 W.
Westville, IN 46391
MN m./'
28300-08
'
"
STATE OF INDIANA ) IN'I'HECARROLL CIRCUIT COURT"

.
. _
)SS:
_+CQUNTYOFCARROLL ) . .
.: ,:-g
'
.
.
STA'I'EOF INDIANA ) 'CAUSENUIVIBER:08C01-22i0-MR£§601
.
'
)
vs. )
,1.-
-
-, )
'- --'RICHARDM~ALLEN )

One CVS Drive
|
""13WoonsockegR102895
'
'
'>' ~ ".
" Pursuanttonulé'z ofthelndianaRIilw ofCriminal
Procedure, youarehereby directedto
~
produce the following to counsel for the Carroll County Prosecutor, Nicholas C. McLeland, at 101
H.- -i}-.' :«xi'ik I
West Main Street, Suite 204, Delphi, Indiana 46923 within thirty (30) days of receipt.
1. All documents requested 1n the accompanying Request for Production ofDocuments

-'
: II I
to a Non-Party.
l] 'I
..
I if; I
2. An cxcctlted Afiidavit of Custodian or Records (enclosed).

'
t' \ 3 . (I I .
Submitted under my hand as counsel of record, pursuant to T.R. 2, on this 3121" day
I' .H'I'n;
oprril,2023.-
'
a"'-'- Respectfully submitted,
: . .1 \-.i"CC c}. v
'\l"lr' -
.
'. '.||. "1' . :WM: C Nicholas C. McLeland, #28300-08
l'ii" -'(
f. '. . 1 l
-
Carroll County Prosecutor '31'
The Court finds that the requirements of .Omar v. State of Indiana are met and the.Request for. .
Leave 1s Approved this 3 day ofM31, 2023.
My
ces Gull ecial Judge
oII Circuit Court
.
fill his
'S'TA'I'E or INDIANA ) lNTI-IECARROLL CIRCUITCOURi'l'
.
_
)ss:
COUNTY or CARROLL )
STATE OFINDIANA ) CAUSENIm/IBER:08C01-2210-mél)0001

,
_, )
vs. )
..
_
-
lv'
'
)
'RICHARDMALLEN )
T0: Westville Correctional Facility

Attn: Elise Gallagher ,
" '~' . .
' _
' "i
5501 s. 1100 w. "
'~
Westvillc, IN 46391
PmsuanttoRule2 ofthe IndianaRules oka'iminal Procedure, youarehereby directedto
produce the following to counsel for the Carroll County Prosecutor, Nicholas C. McLeIand,
' '1
at 101
'
E .-. ' l . . u . . 'J'u':
WestMaiu Street, Suite 204, Delphi, Indiana 46923 within thirty (30) days ofreceipt:
' '
1. All documents requested in the accompanying Request for Production of Do cumcnts
t. ' 1
to a Non-Party.
2. An executed Affidavit of Custodian or accords (enclosed).

f, l
Submitted lmder my hand as counsel of record, pursuant to I'.R. 2, on this A127" day
.
' 1.: l
'
'
of April, 2023. '
'l.
1.1. . L' l'it'.'"\.lu
\
"A C "7M
Nicholas c. McLeland, #2§3 00-08
I '9' 'f
'1' .. _' ~. : -- Carroll County Prosecutor
The Court finds that the-requirements of .Omar. v. State of Indiana are met and the.
Leave is Approved this 5 day of Anpél72023.
: .
My
. I
,|
. . .
, ,
,F ces Gull, sp\e<5'1u1 Judge
01] Circuit Court .
-
[I s it'l'.i i 1' 'l'. Ci -l l I: ' I
"a": r I!-
i;' _;id'.
)SS:
)
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
v. )
)
RICHARD ALLEN )
ORDER
Comes now Accused, by counsel, having filed Motion to Suppress Fruits of
Search of 1967 North Whiteman Drive, Delphi, Indiana, and the Court being
duly advised in the premises, now finds that a hearing on said motion should
take place on June 15th, 2023 at 8:30 a.m.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED.
Date: ________________
Distribution:
Filed: 5/19/2023 4:43 PM

)SS:
)
STATE OF INDIANA )
)
v. )
)
RICHARD ALLEN )
MOTION TO SUPPRESS FRUITS OF SEARCH OF 1967 NORTH WHITEMAN

DRIVE, DELPHI, INDIANA
Comes now the Accused, by counsel and through counsel, and pursuant to
the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and
Article 1, Section 11 of the Constitution of the State of Indiana moves to
suppress all evidence obtained by the defective search warrant was issued
without probable cause. In support of said motion, the Accused states:
1. The affidavit submitted in support of the search warrant failed to

establish that the items to be seized were in the residence, or could be
expected to be in the residence, at the time of the search.

provide particular information that particular items related to the
particular crime would be found in the Accused’s home, but rather
provided generic information concerning generic items that could be
found in the Accused’s home, or any other home, potentially, in
Indiana.

connect the generic items for which it was seeking to the actual items
that were possibly used in the crime for which he is now charged.
4. The search warrant was unreasonable under both the Indiana and
federal Constitution.
WHEREFORE, Accused respectfully prays the Court to schedule this

motion for a hearing on June 15th, 2023 at 8:30 a.m. and thereafter grant
suppression.
Respectfully submitted.
/s/ Andrew Baldwin

Counsel for Defendant
150 N. Main St.
317-736-0053
/s/ Andrew Baldwin


Combo of Allen Docs

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Combo of Allen Docs

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Combo of Allen Docs

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Filed: 4/5/2023 10:39 AM

Carroll Circuit Court

STATE OF INDIANA ) IN THE CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT

THE STATE OF INDIANA, TO THE SHERIFF, GREETINGS:

WITNESS, this (afﬁday of May, 2023.

HILLIS, HIL ZZI

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION TO NON-PARTY

Bradley A. Rozzi requests that such production be made to Bradley A. Rozzi,

producing party is entitled to security against damages or payment of damages

STATE OF INDIANA ) IN THE CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT

TO: Robert P. Baston, #209210

The State of Indiana, to the Sheriff of said County, Greetings:

You are hereby commanded to summon Robert P. Baston, #209210, c/o

WITNESS, Clerk of said Court, this 9th day of June, 2023.

HILLIS, HILLIS, ROZZI & DE

Indianapolis Regional Laboratory Telephone: (317) 921-5300

Laboratory Case Number: 17K-00066

Laboratory activities were performed between 10/14/2022 and 10/19/2022.

Agency Case Number 17ISPC0017482).

METHODOLOGY USED To REACH RESULTS/OPINIONS/INTERPRETATIONS:

Page 1 0" Reviewed by. 4875

Page 2 of 2 Reviewed by: 4875

Indianapolis Regionai Laboratory Telephone: (317) 921-5300

:0! .L 550 W. 16th Street, Suite C

Laboratory Case Number: 19K-00197

Laboratory Item 315 Sealed plastic bag containing one cartridge.

Laboratory Item 316 Sealed plastic bag containing one cartridge.

0f 3 Reviewed by: 4375

Laboratory Case Number. 19K-00l97

Examination of the cartridge in item 315 revealed it to be a 40 S&W caliber cartridge

Examination of the cartridge in item 316 revealed it to be a 40 S&W caliber cartridge

Examination of the seventeen cartridges in item 317 revealed each to be a 4O S&W

METHODOLOGY USED TO REACH RESULTS/OPINIONS/INTERPRETATIONS:

Reviewed by: 4875

STATE OF INDIANA ) IN THE CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT

Facility, 5501 S 1100 W, Westville, IN 46391, a Subpoena and Request for

B Elley A 'zzi. #23365

FRANCES C. GULL, SPECIAL JUDGE

SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER ON SAFEKEEPING

resolution of this cause. The Court further orders the

unless otherwise ordered by this Court.

All of which is Ordered

FRANCES C. GULL, SPECIAL JUDGE

TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

FRANCES C. GULL, SPECIAL JUDGE

execution of further Contents and Waivers by Defendant Allen.

FRANCES C. GULL, SPECIAL JUDGE

STATE OF INDIANA ) IN THE CARROLL CIRCUIT COURT

EMEGENCY MOTION TO MODIFY SAFEKEEPING ORDER

the Indiana Department of Corrections, as designated by the Commissioner of the

by the Indiana Department of Corrections wherein thousands of individuals convicted

presumed innocent, as the presumption should be with Mr. Allen;

committing further crimes within the Department of Corrections. Counsel was

7. "The requirement of equal protection dictates, as appellees here agree, that

unjustiﬁable conﬁnement of detainees under worse conditions than convicted

[D.Conn.197l }; Tyler v. Ciccone. 299 F.Sugp. 684 [W.D.Mo.196 9 1.";

b Mr. Allen is sleeping on a pad on a concrete ﬂoor.

Mr. Allen is routinely supervised by other inmates ("companions" as

require making logistical arrangements with prison ofﬁcials in advance of visits. 2;

10. It is diﬁ'icult, if not impossible, for Mr. Allen's Attorneys to share

Agency Case Number 17ISPC0017482).

acopy of this. document by the County eﬁling

Leave of Court to Subpoena ThirdParty Records;

of this document by the County eﬁling

STATE 0F INDIANA ) CAUSE NUMBER: 080012210MR00001