Baer v. State
942 N.E.2d 80
Ind.2011Background
- Baer killed Cory Clark and her four-year-old daughter Jenna in Cory's duplex; he was convicted of two murders and sentenced to death, and the jury rejected a request for a GBMI verdict.
- Baer sought post-conviction relief; the PCR court denied relief, and Baer appealed to the Indiana Supreme Court.
- During trial, Baer was mentally ill; the defense focused on mental illness while the State argued about GBMI and death eligibility.
- Baer raised numerous PCR claims including prosecutorial misconduct, trial and appellate counsel ineffective assistance, and challenges to the death penalty.
- The Supreme Court reviews for clear error and affirms the PCR court’s denial, upholding the death sentence and rejecting Baer’s claims about GBMI and mental retardation.
- Statutory framework: GBMI requires substantial mental illness; sentencing and post-conviction review are governed by Indiana statute and case law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance—mental health evaluations and GBMI strategy | Baer claims trial counsel failed to obtain timely/comprehensive evaluations and to pursue GBMI. | State contends counsel adequately investigated and presented Baer's mental health; evidence was cumulative. | Not proven; counsel’s performance not deficient and not prejudicial. |
| Rejection of GBMI plea | Counsel should have accepted GBMI based on expert opinions. | Judge acted within discretion; two experts disagreed on GBMI impact. | No abuse of discretion; rejection of GBMI plea affirmed. |
| Adequacy of jury selection and mitigation discussion | Counsel failed to challenge potentially mitigating jurors and discuss mitigation sufficiently. | Counsel conducted thorough voir dire; jurors open to mitigation. | Counsel’s voir dire and mitigation presentation were reasonable. |
| Appellate counsel ineffective handling of prosecutorial misconduct claim | Maynard inadequately framed prosecutorial misconduct on appeal. | Appellate presentation was reasonable; issues largely foreclosed. | Not ineffective; strategic decision supported by record. |
| Newly discovered evidence and mental retardation/Atkins issue | Taylor's testimony shows longstanding psychosis; could undermine confidence in sentence. | Taylor evidence insufficiently probable to change outcome; not newly discovered for relief. | Not newly discovered evidence; does not undermine confidence in death sentence. |
Key Cases Cited
- Baer v. State, 866 N.E.2d 752 (Ind. 2007) (direct appeal GBMI/death proceedings and related issues cited by court)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Kennedy v. Louisiana, 554 U.S. 407 (U.S. 2008) (limits on death penalty for certain crimes)
- Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (U.S. 2002) (mental retardation and execution standards)
- Matheney v. State, 833 N.E.2d 454 (Ind. 2005) (Indiana constitution and execution of mentally ill)
- Prowell v. State, 741 N.E.2d 704 (Ind. 2001) (GBMI and sentencing interpretations)
- Woods v. State, 701 N.E.2d 1208 (Ind. 1998) (mitigating evidence and post-conviction review)
- McManus v. State, 868 N.E.2d 778 (Ind. 2007) (definition of mental retardation for Atkins inquiry)
- Shafer v. South Carolina, 532 U.S. 36 (U.S. 2001) (parole and life sentence connotations; parole context)