Steven James Burns, II. v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.), 79A02-1701-CR-7

On Aug. 18–19, 2016 Steven Burns and two others obtained firearms, entered Jerry and Linda Mathews’ home at night, threatened and assaulted Jerry Mathews, and stole property. Burns both possessed firearms before the entry and used one during the burglary.
The State charged Burns with multiple felonies, including Level 2 burglary while armed and Level 4 serious violent felon in possession of a firearm; a jury convicted him of most charges.
The trial court merged some counts for double jeopardy concerns but sentenced Burns to an aggregate 70-year term based on remaining convictions and a habitual-offender enhancement.
On appeal Burns argued double jeopardy violations under (1) Article I, § 14 of the Indiana Constitution (actual‑evidence test) and (2) Indiana common law double jeopardy (enhancement duplication).
The dispute centered on whether the evidence used to convict Burns for being a felon in possession (possession before entry) overlapped with the evidence used to convict him of burglary while armed (possession/use during the burglary).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether burglary while armed and serious violent felon in possession violate Indiana constitutional double jeopardy under the "actual evidence" test	State: convictions rest on distinct facts — possession before entry supports felon‑in‑possession; possession/use during entry supports burglary while armed	Burns: the same possession of a firearm was used to convict both offenses, creating double jeopardy	No violation — court found no reasonable possibility jury used the identical facts to convict both; convictions may rest on separate factual predicates
Whether convictions violate Indiana common‑law double jeopardy as an impermissible duplication of punishment (enhancement overlap)	State: possession as a felon and later use in a violent burglary are separate harms/crimes	Burns: the enhancement (possession) duplicates punishment for the burglary armed with a firearm	No violation — possession as a prior‑convicted felon and using the gun in a violent offense are distinct; punishment was not for the same behavior twice

Richardson v. State, 717 N.E.2d 32 (Ind. 1999) (establishes Indiana constitutional actual‑evidence double jeopardy test)
Rexroat v. State, 966 N.E.2d 165 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (standards for actual‑evidence review)
Goldsberry v. State, 821 N.E.2d 447 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (sources to determine facts used by the jury)
Vandergriff v. State, 812 N.E.2d 1084 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (recognizing common‑law double jeopardy categories)
Pierce v. State, 761 N.E.2d 826 (Ind. 2002) (discussing non‑constitutional double jeopardy principles)
Guyton v. State, 771 N.E.2d 1141 (Ind. 2002) (enumerates five categories of common‑law double jeopardy)
Mickens v. State, 742 N.E.2d 927 (Ind. 2001) (distinguishes carrying/possession from using a firearm in a separate offense)