John Chupp v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
49A02-1707-CR-1463
Ind. Ct. App.Jan 5, 2018Background
- In 1982 John Chupp was identified as one of three men who violently burglarized, robbed, raped, and confined a 72-year-old victim; he was convicted of Class A burglary, Class A robbery (later reduced), and Class B criminal confinement.
- The trial court originally imposed concurrent 50-year terms for Class A felonies and a consecutive 20-year term for the Class B conviction (aggregate 70 years).
- After post-conviction litigation the robbery conviction was vacated as a Class A felony and reclassified as a Class C felony with an 8-year concurrent sentence; the aggregate sentence remained 70 years.
- Chupp filed multiple motions to correct erroneous sentence over the years, challenging double jeopardy and consecutive sentencing; prior appeals affirmed the trial court.
- In 2017 Chupp moved to correct his sentence again, arguing the sentencing judgment failed to specify the amount of good-time credit (pretrial credit time) as required by statute. The trial court denied the motion, and Chupp appealed.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed, applying Robinson v. State to presume that an order reporting pre-sentence confinement days but not separately designating credit time awards equal credit time days.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the sentencing judgment is erroneous on its face for failing to specify good-time (credit) days for pretrial confinement | Chupp: commitment order failed to separately list time served and statutory credit time, so sentence is erroneous | State: commitment order listed pre-sentence confinement days and language about credit; Robinson presumption corrects any omission | Court: Affirmed — Robinson presumption applies; the order is understood to award equal credit time, so no facial sentencing error |
Key Cases Cited
- Robinson v. State, 805 N.E.2d 783 (Ind. 2004) (omission of express designation of credit time is cured by presumption awarding credit time equal to pre-sentence confinement days)
- Chupp v. State, 509 N.E.2d 835 (Ind. 1987) (direct appeal affirming convictions and detailing underlying facts)
- Fry v. State, 939 N.E.2d 687 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (standard of review: abuse of discretion for motion to correct erroneous sentence)