Theodore T. Schwartz v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
02A03-1602-PC-279
| Ind. Ct. App. | Nov 7, 2016Background
- In 2009 Theodore T. Schwartz broke into J.H.’s home, assaulted and sexually assaulted her, used a knife, and fled in her car; he was later apprehended.
- State charged 15 felonies; Schwartz pleaded guilty in 2010 to nine counts (including multiple Class A felonies) with sentencing left to the court.
- Trial court sentenced Schwartz to an aggregate 100-year term; several counts were dismissed or merged.
- Schwartz filed a post-conviction relief (PCR) petition alleging ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel and that his guilty plea was not knowing/voluntary.
- The PCR court granted partial relief: it concluded the evidence did not support “serious bodily injury” and reduced the robbery (Count 5) from Class A to Class C and battery (Count 7) to a Class A misdemeanor; it denied all other relief.
- On appeal the Court of Appeals affirmed, rejecting Schwartz’s remaining ineffective-assistance and voluntariness claims and finding no prejudice from counsel’s conduct.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Schwartz) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance of trial counsel re: serious bodily injury enhancements | Campbell failed to challenge that J.H.’s injuries did not meet statutory "serious bodily injury" so enhancements were improper | State conceded trial counsel should have challenged serious bodily injury; PCR court reduced the convictions accordingly | Held in part for plaintiff: PCR court reduced robbery and battery based on lack of serious bodily injury (partial relief granted) |
| Ineffective assistance of trial counsel re: multiple deadly-weapon enhancements (knife) | Counsel failed to argue double enhancement was improper because the knife was not used repeatedly for multiple counts | State and PCR court: victim testified knife "was always present," threat facilitated all sexual acts; multiple enhancements permissible | Held for defendant: no ineffective assistance shown and no reasonable probability of success on that claim |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel re: plea/competency | Counsel allowed plea while competency evaluation was pending in another county and failed to ensure competence | State: trial court and counsel observed petitioner, inquired about mental health, and found him competent; competency hearing elsewhere was withdrawn | Held for defendant: no ineffective assistance; no evidence petitioner was incompetent to plead |
| Voluntariness of guilty plea | Plea not knowing/voluntary because Schwartz did not understand "serious bodily injury" element he pleaded to | State: trial court advised Schwartz of charges, rights waived, and penalties; record supports an informed plea; overwhelming evidence of guilt | Held for defendant: plea was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary despite the mistaken enhancement issue (collateral attack limited); overall conviction affirmed except PCR reductions |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Missouri v. Frye, 132 S. Ct. 1399 (prejudice standard in plea negotiation context)
- Drope v. Missouri, 420 U.S. 162 (competency to stand trial requirement)
- North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (test for validity of guilty plea: voluntary and intelligent choice)
- Ben‑Yisrayl v. State, 738 N.E.2d 253 (PCR scope and burden)
- Owens v. State, 897 N.E.2d 537 (same‑injury enhancement principles)
- Marshall v. State, 832 N.E.2d 615 (threat of weapon once can support multiple enhanced counts if it facilitates separate offenses)
- Henley v. State, 881 N.E.2d 639 (standards for ineffective assistance of appellate counsel)