Christopher Macy v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
49A05-1601-PC-100
| Ind. Ct. App. | Apr 12, 2017Background
- Macy, a maintenance worker, struck Darrick Mitchell repeatedly in the head with a flashlight; Mitchell later died from his wounds. Macy was convicted of voluntary manslaughter (class A felony) and sentenced to 45 years.
- On direct appeal Macy challenged admission of autopsy photos; conviction affirmed.
- Macy filed a post-conviction relief (PCR) petition claiming ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel and sought subpoenas for witnesses including the trial pathologist.
- The PCR court allowed subpoenas for several witnesses but denied a subpoena for the forensic pathologist and the trial judge as irrelevant to Macy’s PCR claims.
- The PCR court found counsel not ineffective and denied relief; Macy appealed, arguing subpoena denial, ineffective assistance (trial and appellate), and sentencing error.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Denial of subpoena for forensic pathologist | Pathologist’s testimony opened door to argue a second assailant; pathologist could provide additional relevant info | Pathologist would not provide additional relevant/probative testimony; Macy failed to identify what new evidence would be obtained | Denial affirmed — Macy failed to show what additional relevant info would be discovered or prejudice from absence |
| Ineffective assistance of trial counsel | Counsel should have pursued theory that a third party entered after Macy’s beating and killed Mitchell | Counsel reasonably pursued heat-of-passion strategy to avoid murder conviction; evidence of Macy’s culpability was overwhelming; strategy succeeded (conviction reduced to voluntary manslaughter) | Denied — counsel’s performance was reasonable under Strickland and no deficient performance shown |
| Ineffective assistance of appellate counsel | Appellate counsel omitted at least eight issues Macy proposed (including trial counsel ineffectiveness, jury instruction errors, sentencing challenges) | Appellate counsel reasonably selected issues; omitted claims lacked merit or were unsupported by the record; strategic choices entitled to deference | Denied — Macy failed to show appellate-selection was unquestionably unreasonable or that omitted issues would likely change outcome |
| Sentencing / mitigating provocation | Macy argued voluntary manslaughter implies provocation and should have been mitigating | Trial court found facts did not support the specific provocation Macy asserted (Macy initiated the attack) | Denied — trial court did not err in rejecting provocation as mitigating; issue was available earlier and lacks merit |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-part test for ineffective assistance: deficient performance and prejudice)
- Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362 (2000) (discusses appellate review of counsel performance and Strickland principles)
- Timberlake v. State, 753 N.E.2d 591 (Ind. 2001) (summarizes ineffective-assistance standards and deference to counsel's strategic choices)
- Williams v. State, 724 N.E.2d 1070 (Ind. 2000) (petitioner must identify what additional information would be discovered and show prejudice from its absence)
- Hampton v. State, 961 N.E.2d 480 (Ind. 2012) (deference to appellate counsel’s selection of issues)