Opinion

Evans v. State

  • 751 N.E.2d 245
  • 2001 Ind. App. LEXIS 873
  • 2001 WL 564323
Court
Indiana Court of Appeals
Filed
May 25, 2001
Status
Published
Author
Brook
On the bench
Vaidik, Robb, Brook
Cited by
2 cases
Authority
More cited than 9.9%

investigating officer’s comments at sentencing were his personal opinions as crime victim and did not breach plea agreement under which prosecution agreed to recommend particular sentence

How later courts described this case

  • investigating officer’s comments at sentencing were his personal opinions as crime victim and did not breach plea agreement under which prosecution agreed to recommend particular sentence
  • considering appeal from the denial of a motion to correct erroneous sentence as an appeal from the denial of a petition for post-conviction relief

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

BROOK, Judge,

concurring

I fully concur with Judge Vaidik's reasoning and result in this case, but I write separately to suggest a way of avoiding future confusion as to the meaning of similar "no recommendation" provisions in plea agreements.

When the State promises a criminal defendant under a plea agreement that it will offer no sentencing recommendation to the trial court, the better practice might be for the plea agreement to specify that although the prosecuting attorney could not offer such a recommendation, (1) any witness, whether a private citizen or a State agent, may do so by leave of court; and (2) any victim of the defendant's crime, whether a private citizen or a State agent, is entitled to do so under Indiana Code Section 35-85-38-5(b). A "no recommendation" provision is obviously meaningful to a criminal defendant, who might understandably yet mistakenly believe that no one, *249 particularly a State agent, will be permitted to make a recommendation at the sentencing hearing. Although prosecutors and defense counsel will be familiar with the meaning of "no recommendation" provisions as explained in Harris and the instant case, it is safe to assume that most criminal defendants will not be. For reasons of fundamental fairness, then, I would encourage its inclusion in written plea agreements where applicable. See Sinn v. State, 693 N.E.2d 78, 80 (Ind.Ct.App.1998) ("The concept of plea bargaining contemplates an explicit agreement between the State and defendant which is binding upon both parties when accepted by the trial court. Strict adherence to the agreement is essential.") (emphasis added) (citation omitted).

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.