Brandon C. Staggs v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.), 79A02-1705-CR-1152

Background

In June 2016, Brandon C. Staggs, subject to a CHINS no-contact order, slept while intoxicated with illegal drugs and had his three-week-old son Z.S. on the sofa; the infant was later found between cushions and died of positional asphyxiation.
Police found heroin in Staggs’s home and his toxicology showed multiple controlled substances; the State charged him with seven counts including level 1 neglect resulting in death, level 5 narcotics possession (child present), and maintaining a common nuisance.
Staggs entered an open plea agreement, pleading guilty to level 1 neglect resulting in death, level 5 narcotics possession, and level 6 maintaining a common nuisance; four counts were dismissed and sentencing was left to the court.
The trial court identified multiple aggravators (substance-abuse history; severe harm beyond offense elements; victim under 12; criminal history; bond/no-contact violation) and some mitigators (guilty plea, cooperation, family support).
The court imposed consecutive and concurrent terms producing a 39-year aggregate sentence (37 years executed: 35 in DOC, 2 in community corrections, then 2 years suspended to probation).

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Staggs)	Held
Double jeopardy / multiple convictions	Plea waived challenges; convictions stand	Convictions for neglect and nuisance duplicate same evidence, so lesser convictions must be vacated	Plea agreement precludes double jeopardy challenge on direct appeal; claim barred
Amendment to charging information	Amendment corrected clerical mens rea error; permissible under statute	Trial court erred in allowing amendment at sentencing	Staggs waived objection by not objecting; amendment lawful under I.C. § 35-34-1-5(a)(5)
Sufficiency of factual basis for plea	Factual basis as adjudicated was adequate	State failed to establish factual basis for narcotics possession and nuisance pleas	Challenge attacks convictions and is precluded on direct appeal; must be raised in postconviction relief
Advisement of sentencing exposure	Court adequately advised maximum exposure including fines and aggregate exposure	Inadequate advisement regarding fines and consecutive sentencing undermined plea voluntariness	Voluntariness challenges barred on direct appeal; record shows court advised on fines and aggregate/max exposure
Use of aggravators at sentencing	Aggravators (victim age, greater-than-element harm, etc.) fit the circumstances and are proper to consider	Court improperly used elements of offenses (e.g., victim age for narcotics enhancement; death is element of neglect) as aggravators	Court acted within discretion: age and the particularized circumstances (violation of no-contact, drug stupor, past history) were proper aggravators; even if overlap exists, remaining reasons sustain sentence
Appropriateness of aggregate 39-year sentence	Sentence justified by egregious facts and poor character/history	Sentence is excessive compared to advisory terms	Staggs failed to meet burden under App. R. 7(B); sentence not inappropriate given offense nature and his character

Key Cases Cited

Garrett v. State, 992 N.E.2d 710 (Ind. 2013) (actual-evidence double jeopardy test)
Richardson v. State, 717 N.E.2d 32 (Ind. 1999) (framework for actual-evidence test)
Lee v. State, 816 N.E.2d 35 (Ind. 2004) (guilty pleas waive many substantive and procedural claims)
Anglemyer v. State, 868 N.E.2d 482 (Ind. 2007) (sentencing review; sentencing statement standards)
Gomillia v. State, 13 N.E.3d 846 (Ind. 2014) (improper to use material elements as aggravators; remaining proper factors may still sustain sentence)
McCann v. State, 749 N.E.2d 1116 (Ind. 2001) (upholding sentence despite reliance on improper factor where other reasons supported sentence)
Akard v. State, 937 N.E.2d 811 (Ind. 2010) (scope of appellate revision under Appellate Rule 7(B))