Absent a defendant’s personal waiver on the record, it is fundamental error to deny a request for trial by jury even when defendant was advised of and failed to comply with Criminal Rule 22 requiring a written demand for a jury trial ten days before the scheduled trial date.
Criminal
Messersmith v. State, No. 48A05-1511-CR-1936, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Feb. 15, 2017).
Defendant’s due process rights were violated when the trial court allowed the State to withdraw the plea agreement over the Defendant’s’s objection because the victim had not been notified.
Owens v. State, No. 49A02-1605-CR-1142, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind. Ct. App., Jan. 31, 2017).
After a guilty verdict or finding, a trial court judge must allow defense counsel to make a meaningful sentencing argument, must advise defendant of the right to speak on his own behalf, and must afford defendant an opportunity to make a statement.
Wampler v. State, No. 14S05-1701-CR-37, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jan. 25, 2017).
Even where a trial court has not abused its discretion in sentencing, the Indiana Constitution and Appellate Rule 7(B) authorizes revision of a sentence if it is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and the character of the offender.
Shoun v. State, No. 20S00-1601-LW-00061, __ N.E.3d __ (Ind., Jan. 25, 2017).
The defendant’s sentence of life without parole (LWOP) is proportional considering the severe nature of the crime and his character.