Charles Goodman v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.), 30A04-1608-CR-1937

On July 28, 2015, Goodman, driving a church bus with children and other passengers, veered off I-70, struck a tree, and the bus flipped; a child passenger (J.W.) died.
Goodman was trapped under the bus, airlifted to a hospital, told officers he had fallen asleep, and consented to a blood draw that later detected a cocaine metabolite.
The State charged Goodman with reckless homicide (Level 5) and driving with a suspended license; it later amended to add operating a vehicle while intoxicated causing death (Level 4).
At trial the State sought to admit a photograph of the victim’s corpse over Goodman’s objection; an ISP accident reconstructionist testified the crash resulted from driver fatigue “coupled with” Goodman’s positive blood-test results.
The jury convicted Goodman of operating a vehicle while intoxicated causing death (Level 4) and driving with a suspended license; the court sentenced him to six years (three years suspended).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether admission of a photograph of the victim’s corpse was admissible or unduly prejudicial	Photo was probative to identify the victim and show the accident caused death	Photo was unduly prejudicial and should have been excluded under Evidence Rule 403	Admission was at most error but harmless because independent evidence sufficiently proved the crime
Whether Goodman’s six-year sentence (three suspended) is inappropriate under App. R. 7(B)	Sentence is within statutory range and appropriate given nature of offense and defendant’s conduct	Sentence is inappropriate given circumstances	Sentence is not inappropriate; affirmed

McVey v. State, 863 N.E.2d 434 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (standard for reviewing evidentiary rulings and harmless-error principle when evidence is cumulative)
Wickizer v. State, 626 N.E.2d 795 (Ind. 1993) (erroneously admitted evidence is harmless if independent evidence shows no substantial likelihood the questioned evidence contributed to conviction)
Lee v. State, 735 N.E.2d 1169 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000) (photographs are generally admissible if relevant and not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice)
Childress v. State, 848 N.E.2d 1073 (Ind. 2006) (defendant bears burden to show sentence is inappropriate under Appellate Rule 7(B))
Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219 (Ind. 2008) (factors for 7(B) review and appellate role to ‘leaven the outliers’)
Anglemyer v. State, 868 N.E.2d 482 (Ind. 2007) (advisory sentence as legislative starting point and sentencing framework)