Andrew Conley v. State of Indiana
2012 Ind. LEXIS 642
| Ind. | 2012Background
- Conley, then 17½, murdered his 10-year-old brother Conner while babysitting; he confessed and pled guilty to murder.
- The crime occurred between 8:30 and 10:00 p.m. as Conley failed to secure a sitter and instead killed Conner with choking, a bag over the head, and dragging the body to the trunk.
- Conley disposed of Conner’s body in the woods after dragging it outside, cleaned up, and later acted normal, including spending time with his girlfriend before reporting the killing to police.
- A sentencing phase followed five days of testimony and 155 exhibits; the trial court sentenced Conley to life without parole (LWOP).
- On appeal, Conley raises four issues: admissibility of Dr. James Daum’s testimony; whether aggravating and mitigating factors were properly weighed; Rule 7(B) review; and the constitutionality of LWOP for a juvenile.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Daum’s testimony was admissible. | Daum’s testimony offered a psychopathy line of reasoning. | Daum testified only in rebuttal and did not offer a full psychopathy diagnosis. | No abuse of discretion; Daum’s limited rebuttal testimony was permissible. |
| Whether the aggravating and mitigating factors were properly weighed. | Mitigating factors should have outweighed the single aggravator (Conner’s youth). | The trial court properly weighed multiple mitigators and found aggravation outweighed them. | No manifest abuse of discretion; aggravation outweighed mitigation. |
| Whether Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B) review supports reducing the sentence. | Rule 7(B) allows revising the sentence when inappropriate. | Discretionary deference to trial court; 7(B) should not substitute its own judgment. | Rule 7(B) review affirmed; no basis to revise the LWOP for this juvenile. |
| Whether LWOP for a juvenile homicide offender is constitutional under US and Indiana law. | Miller v. Alabama renders mandatory LWOP unconstitutional for those under 18; youth matters. | LWOP discretionary in Indiana; Miller does not compel categorical ban here. | LWOP for a juvenile homicide offender is constitutional under both US and Indiana constitutions given discretionary sentencing and case-specific factors. |
Key Cases Cited
- Krempetz v. State, 872 N.E.2d 605 (Ind. 2007) (standards for weighing aggravators and mitigators in LWOP cases)
- Dumas v. State, 803 N.E.2d 1113 (Ind. 2004) (burden of proof in penalty phase LWOP trials)
- Bivins v. State, 642 N.E.2d 928 (Ind. 1994) (limit aggravators to statutory ones; relevance of evidence in capital cases)
- Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (S. Ct. 2010) (juvenile life penalties in nonhomicide offenses; youth matters in punishment)
- Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (S. Ct. 2005) (juvenile death penalty invalid; youth diminishes culpability)
- Miller v. Alabama, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (S. Ct. 2012) (mandatory LWOP for juveniles unconstitutional; individualized sentencing required)
- Andrews (Missouri v. Andrews), 329 S.W.3d 369 (Mo. 2010) (state constitution analyses of juvenile LWOP)