The sentence imposed by the trial court, including the habitual substance offender enhancement, is not inappropriate under Appellate Rule 7(B) and does not warrant appellate revision.
Criminal
McCallister v. State, No. 87S00-1609-LW-497, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Feb. 15, 2018).
The evidence, including surveillance video and phone conversations, supported jury conviction of murder and conspiracy to commit murder. LWOP sentence was proper as the jury, not the court, weighs the mitigating and aggravating factors.
Phipps v. State, No. 28S05-1707-CR-499, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Feb. 16, 2018).
Circumstantial evidence may be used to prove intent to violate a protective order and trial courts may weigh ongoing acts of criminal misconduct as an aggravating factor to enhance sentencing.
Brantley v. State, No. 18S-CR-98, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Feb. 16, 2018).
Voluntary manslaughter may be brought as a standalone charge with the element of sudden heat as a mitigating factor, which a jury may consider along with claims of self-defense.
State v. Bonds, No. 49A02-1704-CR-770, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 6, 2018).
For a misdemeanor, State does not have the right to demand a jury trial and State’s consent to a bench trial is unnecessary.