Ragland v. State

I respectfully dissent. In Gregory v. State, 644 N.E.2d 543 (Ind.1994) our Supreme Court reaffirmed its decision in Beno v. State, 581 N.E.2d 922 (Ind.1991) by saying that the court has held “consecutive sentences manifestly unreasonable where the state sponsors a series of offenses in a sting operation.” As in Beno, Gregory sold the same drug to the same informant on several occasions over a short period. In the instant case, Ragland sold the same drug to the same informant within a six day period. It seems quite clear to me that our Supreme Court has held that in these circumstances…