105 N.E.3d 1081
Ind.2018Background
- On Oct. 26, 2015 Marquell Jackson and others attempted a robbery; a gunfight ensued and multiple people were injured.
- Jackson was convicted of multiple felonies (burglary, attempted robbery resulting in serious bodily injury, attempted armed robberies, aggravated batteries) and a jury found a criminal-gang enhancement applied to each count.
- The trial court imposed concurrent terms for the felonies and then added a 30-year criminal-gang enhancement, producing a 60-year aggregate sentence.
- The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed the gang enhancement on procedural grounds (improper amendment of the information) and instructed the trial court to vacate the enhancement and its sentence.
- The parties disputed whether, after vacating the gang enhancement, the trial court could resentence the underlying felony convictions on remand.
- The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer to decide the scope of the trial court’s resentencing authority after reversal of a criminal-gang enhancement.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Jackson's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Coble (habitual-offender cases) controls resentencing after a gang-enhancement reversal | Coble and similar precedent permit resentencing on underlying felonies after an enhancement is vacated | Coble prohibits resentencing on underlying felonies when gang enhancement is vacated | Coble's specific holdings for habitual-offender enhancements do not control; its general inquiry is instructive |
| Whether trial court may resentence underlying felonies after criminal-gang enhancement is vacated | The trial court may resentence underlying felonies because the gang enhancement increases punishment for those felonies | The trial court cannot resentence underlying felonies; vacating the enhancement should leave underlying sentences undisturbed | The court held the gang enhancement unambiguously increases punishment for all underlying felonies, so vacating it disturbs punishment and requires resentencing on all underlying felonies (including concurrent/consecutive determinations) |
Key Cases Cited
- Coble v. State, 523 N.E.2d 228 (Ind. 1988) (analyzes resentencing authority after vacated habitual-offender enhancement)
- Flowers v. State, 518 N.E.2d 1096 (Ind. 1988) (supports trial court authority to impose any sentence permitted by statute when original sentence is set aside)
- Greer v. State, 680 N.E.2d 526 (Ind. 1997) (discusses resentencing following vacated habitual-offender enhancements)
- Davis v. State, 898 N.E.2d 281 (Ind. 2008) (addresses proof requirements for gang-enhancement cases)
- Alabama v. Smith, 490 U.S. 794 (U.S. 1989) (limits on resentencing to prevent vindictiveness)