Ivan Juhan Jones v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.), 49A02-1609-CR-2082

Jones was convicted of two offenses: operating a vehicle with an ACE of .15 or more with a prior conviction (Count I) and operating a vehicle while intoxicated with a prior conviction (Count II).
On Oct. 12, 2015, police observed Jones appear intoxicated, fail field sobriety tests, and later record a chemical breath test of .172 g/210 L.
Both offenses arose from the same incident, same date, and same location of Jones operating a vehicle while intoxicated.
Jones stipulated to a prior DWI conviction, affecting sentencing (both were treated as felonies in the information).
The trial court sentenced two years on each count to be served concurrently; on appeal, double jeopardy issues were raised and the State conceded the defenses, leading to vacatur of one conviction.
The court vacated Count II, affirmed Count I, and remanded to amend the sentencing order.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether convictions violate double jeopardy.	Jones argues actual-evidence test bars two convictions.	State concedes two offenses share same facts and should be one conviction.	Vacate Count II; affirm Count I; remand for order amendment.

Wharton v. State, 42 N.E.3d 539 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (actual-evidence test governs multiple convictions)
West v. State, 22 N.E.3d 872 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (double jeopardy when same conduct supports multiple offenses)
Richardson v. State, 717 N.E.2d 32 (Ind. 1999) (two-part test: elements vs. actual evidence)