150 N.E.3d 610
Ind. Ct. App.2020Background
- On September 7, 2019, Matthew Yost fired multiple volleys of gunfire from his house over a ~20-minute period, striking or entering neighboring structures and firing toward Indianapolis officers who had taken cover outside his home.
- Officers called for backup and a SWAT team ultimately secured Yost’s surrender and arrest.
- The State charged Yost with five counts of criminal recklessness (Level 5 felonies); Yost entered an open guilty plea to all five counts and admitted a factual basis.
- At sentencing the court considered testimony about the timing and locations of the multiple volleys and Yost’s criminal history; the court imposed an aggregate 15-year term with some counts concurrent and others consecutive.
- Yost appealed both the convictions (raising double jeopardy) and the sentence (challenging consecutive terms as exceeding the statutory aggregate cap for a single episode of criminal conduct).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a defendant who enters an open guilty plea may directly appeal his convictions | The State: a guilty plea precludes direct appeal of convictions; relief must be sought via post-conviction process except for limited exceptions (sentencing or plea-withdrawal) | Yost: his plea was an open plea (no plea agreement) and thus he may directly challenge his convictions on double jeopardy grounds | Court: Guilty pleas bar direct appeals of convictions; Yost must pursue his claim in a petition for post-conviction relief — appeal of convictions dismissed without prejudice |
| Whether consecutive terms exceeded the statutory maximum for a single "episode of criminal conduct" | The State implicitly argued the court’s sentencing discretion was proper | Yost: his five Level 5 felony convictions arose from a single episode of criminal conduct, so consecutive terms cannot aggregate beyond the statutory cap (7 years for Level 5 most serious offense) | Court: The offenses were a single episode (closely related in time, place, circumstance); imposing an aggregate 15-year sentence violated I.C. § 35-50-1-2(d)(2); sentence reversed and remanded with instruction to limit aggregate term to at most 7 years |
Key Cases Cited
- Tumulty v. State, 666 N.E.2d 394 (Ind. 1996) (guilty plea generally prevents direct appeal of conviction)
- Brightman v. State, 758 N.E.2d 41 (Ind. 2001) (claims following a guilty plea must be raised in post-conviction relief except limited exceptions)
- Collins v. State, 817 N.E.2d 230 (Ind. 2004) (defendant may directly appeal sentencing decisions following a guilty plea)
- Hoskins v. State, 143 N.E.3d 358 (Ind. Ct. App. 2020) (summarizing exceptions permitting direct appeal after guilty plea)
- Daugherty v. State, 52 N.E.3d 885 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016) (aggregate consecutive sentences for a single episode cannot exceed statutory maximum)
- Reed v. State, 856 N.E.2d 1189 (Ind. 2006) (multiple closely spaced shootings treated as one episode of criminal conduct)
- Harris v. State, 861 N.E.2d 1182 (Ind. 2007) (separate acts minutes apart can constitute one episode)
- Purdy v. State, 727 N.E.2d 1091 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000) (definition and analysis of single episode of criminal conduct)
- Wood v. State, 988 N.E.2d 374 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (cumulative sentences for multiple convictions from one episode limited by statute)