Joshua J. Fairley v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
82A04-1703-PC-575
| Ind. Ct. App. | Dec 29, 2017Background
- In June 2010 Fairley shot a 16‑year‑old (H.G.) and then shot himself; he survived with severe head injuries and later was charged with murder.
- Fairley was hospitalized, underwent major neurosurgery, experienced memory and cognitive deficits, but improved over months and by November 2010 was communicating with appointed counsel Dennis Vowels.
- Vowels (experienced public defender) elected not to seek an immediate competency evaluation or file a pretrial suppression motion; he negotiated a plea to murder for a 50‑year executed sentence which Fairley accepted.
- At plea hearing the court engaged in a statutory colloquy, Fairley admitted the charging allegations, and the court found the plea knowingly and voluntarily made.
- Fairley later filed a post‑conviction petition alleging ineffective assistance (failure to investigate competency and to move to suppress his police statement), involuntary plea, and trial court error for not sua sponte ordering a competency evaluation.
- The post‑conviction court denied relief; the Court of Appeals affirmed, finding no clear error in the post‑conviction court’s factual findings or legal conclusions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance — failure to investigate competency | Fairley: Vowels should have investigated/requested a competency evaluation given Fairley’s post‑shooting cognitive impairments; would have stayed proceedings and avoided plea. | State/Vowels: Fairley recovered sufficiently to consult, assist, and understand; counsel reasonably monitored recovery and acted strategically. | Affirmed — counsel not deficient; evidence did not show performance below objective standard. |
| Ineffective assistance — failure to file suppression motion | Fairley: Statement to police was made while incapable of waiving Miranda; a motion to suppress would have aided defense/negotiations. | State/Vowels: Counsel reasonably delayed suppression motion until trial preparation; counsel believed statement likely inadmissible and it did not affect plea bargaining. | Affirmed — strategic choice reasonable; no clear error in post‑conviction court. |
| Voluntariness / factual basis of plea | Fairley: TBI impaired his ability to understand/volunteer plea; PSI assertion of accidental discharge undermines factual basis. | State: Court’s on‑the‑record colloquy satisfied statutory requirements; admission of charging information sufficed for factual basis; post‑plea unsworn PSI statements do not vitiate plea. | Affirmed — plea was knowingly and voluntarily made; factual basis adequate. |
| Trial court sua sponte competency evaluation / due process | Fairley: Given injuries, court should have independently ordered competency evaluation before accepting plea. | State: Any possible impairment had abated; counsel and court on record found Fairley competent; no obvious impairment requiring sua sponte action. | Affirmed — no duty to order evaluation sua sponte under these facts; claim also not reviewable as fundamental error in post‑conviction context. |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishing two‑prong ineffective assistance standard) (discussed re counsel performance and prejudice)
- Segura v. State, 749 N.E.2d 496 (Ind.) (requirements for ineffective assistance claims following guilty pleas)
- Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (treatment of prejudice inquiry for ineffective assistance claims tied to guilty pleas)
- Lee v. United States, 137 S. Ct. 1958 (Sup. Ct.) (noting when suppression errors bear on decision to plead and need for showing benefit from trial)
- Mast v. State, 914 N.E.2d 851 (Ind. Ct. App.) (competency issues and counsel’s duty to ensure evaluations reach court)
- Campbell v. State, 19 N.E.3d 271 (Ind.) (summarizing Strickland application in Indiana post‑conviction context)