Robertson Fowler v. State of Indiana, 977 N.E.2d 464

Fowler pled guilty to unlawful possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon and to a habitual offender enhancement, with other charges dismissed and a 35-year sentencing cap agreed.
Indiana law allowed the same prior felony to support both the serious violent felon charge and the habitual offender enhancement at the time of the plea.
Mills v. State (decided after the plea) held that a defendant cannot have a sentence enhanced under the habitual offender statute by proof of the same felony used to establish serious violent felon status.
Fowler received a 30-year executed sentence (15 for the firearm charge and 15 for the habitual offender enhancement).
Our Court affirmed Fowler’s sentence on direct appeal; Fowler then sought post-conviction relief premised on Mills, which was denied.
The post-conviction court concluded Fowler could not challenge his sentence because he benefited from the plea agreement.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
May Fowler challenge an allegedly illegal sentence after plea?	Fowler argues Mills makes his sentence improper.	State contends plea precludes post-conviction challenge to an illegal sentence.	No; a defendant may not challenge an illegal sentence obtained via a favorable plea.
Was appellate counsel ineffective for not raising Mills on direct appeal?	Fowler asserts prejudice from counsel's failure to raise Mills.	State argues no prejudice because Mills was decided after appeal and strategic reasons may justify not pursuing it.	Not ineffective; Fowler was not prejudiced given the procedural posture and outcome.

Townsend v. State, 793 N.E.2d 1092 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (permits use of same felony for SVF and habitual offender at plea time)
Mills v. State, 868 N.E.2d 446 (Ind. 2007) (cannot enhance habitual offender by proof of same felony used to establish SVF)
Stites v. State, 829 N.E.2d 527 (Ind. 2005) (plea benefits can preclude later challenges to sentence)
Lee v. State, 816 N.E.2d 35 (Ind. 2004) (contract law governs plea bargains and voluntariness of plea)
Ethyl Corp. v. Forcum-Lannom Assocs., Inc., 433 N.E.2d 1214 (Ind. Ct. App. 1982) (post-formation law of contracts forms part of plea agreement unless stated)
McElroy v. State, 864 N.E.2d 392 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (counsel's failure to testify affects proof of ineffective assistance)
Bieghler v. State, 690 N.E.2d 188 (Ind. 1997) (ineffective assistance analysis considers prejudice from appellate counsel)
Wilson v. State, 799 N.E.2d 51 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (post-conviction standard; burden on petitioner)