Jose Miguel Tomas-Felipe v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.), 09A02-1703-CR-607

On June 18, 2016, Jose Miguel Tomas-Felipe entered Iris Cruz’s home while she slept and stabbed her; Cruz sustained serious cuts and required surgery for tendon repair.
Police found Tomas-Felipe fleeing, subdued him; his clothing and body had blood, a bloody knife was found in the victim’s bed, and a fingerprint was on an open window.
The State charged Tomas-Felipe with attempted murder (Level 1), burglary of a dwelling resulting in serious bodily injury (Level 1), and resisting law enforcement (Class A misdemeanor); he pleaded guilty without a plea agreement.
At sentencing the State and trial court agreed the burglary charge’s serious-bodily-injury enhancement overlapped with the attempted murder charge; the court entered judgment on burglary as a Level 4 felony (removing the injury element).
The court imposed 40 years for attempted murder and 12 years for Level 4 burglary to be served consecutively; Tomas-Felipe appealed claiming common-law double jeopardy.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Tomas‑Felipe waived appellate review of double jeopardy by pleading guilty	State: guilty plea can waive double jeopardy claims when part of a plea agreement	Tomas‑Felipe: pleaded without agreement so no waiver	No waiver — plea was without a State agreement, so claim preserved
Whether burglary conviction violates Indiana common‑law double jeopardy principles because it relied on same act as attempted murder	State: court removed injury element, entered burglary as Level 4 to avoid overlap	Tomas‑Felipe: burglary (as charged with serious bodily injury) is based on same stabbing and must be vacated	Held for State — convictions, not charges, control; Level 4 burglary lacks injury element, so no common‑law double jeopardy violation

Mapp v. State, 770 N.E.2d 332 (indicating plea-agreement waiver principles)
Kunberger v. State, 46 N.E.3d 966 (no waiver when guilty plea is without agreement)
Wharton v. State, 42 N.E.3d 539 (same: guilty plea without agreement does not waive double jeopardy claim)
Pierce v. State, 761 N.E.2d 826 (describing Indiana common‑law rules distinct from constitutional double jeopardy test)
Gross v. State, 769 N.E.2d 1136 (remedy: reduce enhanced offense to remove injury element to avoid double jeopardy)
Miller v. State, 790 N.E.2d 437 (principle that two crimes may not be enhanced by the same bodily injury)
Richardson v. State, 717 N.E.2d 32 (constitutional double jeopardy framework referenced by Indiana precedent)