Legal Opinion · Dissent

Anthony H. Dye v. State of Indiana

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided July 31, 2012No. 20S04-1201-CR-5Published

1DissentMassa, J.

As I read it, the serious violent felon statute is not a progressive penalty statute and therefore is not subject to the general prohibition against double enhancement. Even assuming it was, though, I believe Indiana’s General Assembly has provided sufficient guidance that a habitual offender sentencing enhancement is permissible.

These reasons are explained in greater detail below, and lead me to respectfully dissent.

I. The Serious Violent Felon Statute Is Not a Progressive Penalty Statute

First, I disagree with this Court’s prior determination that Indiana Code § 35-47-4-5 (the “SVF…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Matthews v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1958
  2. Freeman v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Haymaker v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1996
  4. Mills v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2007
  5. Ross v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2000

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API