MUNCIE, Ind. -- The Indiana Court of Appeals has denied an appeal by a Muncie inmate to change their gender marker from a male to a female, matching their identification as a transgender woman.
The decision from the Indiana Court of Appeals regarding Cory M. Wallace's request was filed on Monday. This comes after Wallace was sentenced to 72 years in prison in October 2016 after being found guilty of killing Wallace's 5-month-old son and setting the house on fire to cover it up.
According to previous reports, Wallace was charged and found guilty of neglect of a dependent resulting in death as well as arson, battery and obstruction of justice. Wallace's son Jensen was found dead in a home in the 2400 block of Meeker Avenue in February 2015.
At the time, Wallace told authorities the boy died from head injuries he reportedly suffered in a fall. But the autopsy showed that Jensen was shaken severely and had other child abuse-related injuries, like broken ribs.
Wallace appealed the conviction and the sentence, which was eventually rejected by the Indiana Supreme Court in December 2017. This comes after the state's appeals court upheld Wallace's conviction.
In April 2023, Wallace, who was incarcerated at the Pendleton Correctional Facility, filed an ex parte petition to change the gender marker on their birth certificate from male to female. In July 2023, the trial court dismissed Wallace's petition because of them being confined in the Indiana Department of Correction.
In August 2023, Wallace then filed a further petition for relief from judgment, which was also denied by the trial court. After the trial court denials, Wallace filed an appeal.
The court documents state that Wallace is treated as female in the Indiana Department of Correction in accordance with the department's inclusive gender practices for incarcerated individuals procedures.
According to case law, an adult seeking a gender marker change "bears the burden of showing good faith and the absence of a fraudulent purpose" to officially change the marker. But there have been conflicting case law surrounding whether or not the court has any say in specific requirements regarding gender marker changes, stating that it was a job for the General Assembly.
The opinion, written by Judge Patricia Riley, states that recent case law prevents individuals who "realize their gender dystrophy later in life or for various personal reasons were not willing to out themselves" to have any legal recourse.
"In his verified petition for change in gender marker, Wallace asserted that he wanted to have his gender marker changed to reflect that he is now living as a transgender female," the decision reads. "Wallace did not submit any 'adequate documentary evidence' or evidence supporting that his petition was made in good faith and not for a fraudulent or unlawful purpose.
"In the absence of documentary evidence and evidence of (their) good faith, we cannot say that the trial court erred in dismissing Wallace's petition," the opinion continued. "Although we affirm the trial court... we echo the sentiments expressed in (previous case law) that in the absence of any legislative amendment by the General Assembly or jurisprudential guidance by our supreme court, this court operates in a legal gray zone as evidenced by the shifting positions and divisions within this appellate court. Petitioners earnestly seeking a remedy deserve better."
In a concurring but separate opinion, Judge Peter Foley of the Indiana Court of Appeals said that the recent line of case law does not provide a mechanism for relief in this kind of case. Because of this, Foley believes that they do not have the ability to grant relief, no matter what they believe about the merits of that relief.
"In light of the recent division of this court and the lack of statutory guidance in this area, we echo the majority opinion and other panels of this court and again implore the General Assembly to address this issue and provide our courts with guidance on this issue," Foley said.