Matthew L. Johnson v. State of Indiana
2017 Ind. App. LEXIS 169
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Johnson interlocutory appeal from trial court's denial of objection to habitual offender enhancement charges.
- State charged Johnson under two cause numbers with multiple felonies; habitual allegations based on four prior unrelated Class D/other felonies in 2001, 2005, 2006, 2008.
- New legislation limits use of lower-level felonies in habitual determinations; question certified for review.
- Statutory interpretation conducted de novo; lenity applied in balancing legislative intent and defendant rights.
- Historical evolution of habitual offender statute shows gradual reductions in the impact of prior offenses and the ten-year lookback principle.
- Court adopts interpretation: convictions more than ten years old from the current offense do not count for habitual purposes; examine each prior individually on remand.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do lower-level prior felonies all must be within ten years? | Johnson: all lower-level prior felonies must fall within ten years. | State: only some priors need to be within ten years to support habitual status. | Convictions older than ten years do not count; require per-prior review and remand. |
Key Cases Cited
- Sloan v. State, 947 N.E.2d 917 (Ind. 2011) (statutory interpretation de novo and legislative intent guidance)
- Allen v. Allen, 54 N.E.3d 344 (Ind. 2016) (rule of lenity and interpretation for criminal statutes)
- Day v. State, 57 N.E.3d 809 (Ind. 2016) (lenity applied in criminal statutory interpretation)
- Erickson v. State, 438 N.E.2d 269 (Ind. 1982) (definition of 'unrelated' in habitual context)
- Marley v. State, 17 N.E.3d 335 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (relation of habitual offender findings to underlying sentencing statutes)