# Sullivan v. State

> Indiana Court of Appeals · November 10, 2005 · 836 N.E.2d 1031

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9703492

## Case

- **Full name:** John A. SULLIVAN, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff
- **Court:** Indiana Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** November 10, 2005
- **Citations:** 836 N.E.2d 1031; 2005 Ind. App. LEXIS 2124; 2005 WL 3005783
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Barnes
- **Judges:** Crone, Najam, Barnes
- **Cited by:** 15 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9703492

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that where defendant indicated there were no corrections to be made to presentence report and did not object to introduction of probable cause affidavit at sentencing hearing, defendant effectively admitted to contents of report and affidavit
- holding that where the defendant indicated there were no corrections to be made to presentence report and did not object to introduction of probable cause affidavit at sentencing hearing, the defendant effectively admitted to contents of report and affidavit

## Opinion text

BARNES, Judge,
concurring in result.
I concur with the result reached by the majority that any Blakely error in this case was harmless. I disagree with the analysis the majority utilizes with regard to whether it is "confident" the error was harmless, citing to Edwards v. State, 822 N.E.2d 1106, 1110 (Ind.Ct.App.2005). I have elsewhere stated my rationale for believing that we must review Blakely error according to the standard of whether such error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. See Davis v. State, 835 N.E.2d 1087 (Ind.Ct.App., 2005) (Barnes, J., concurring in result). I adhere to that belief in this case. Nonetheless, I conclude that any error in this case in relying on Blakely-impermissible aggravators was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt based on Sullivan's admission of having regularly molested his own children. Therefore, I concur in result.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9703492. Public record. Not legal advice.