Badger v. State

I concur in this opinion and the conclusion that Badger's consecutive sentences, imposed pursuant to a plea agreement, are illegal and constitute fundamental error entitling him to post-conviction relief, I write separately, however, to explain my *937reasons for reaching a conclusion different from that which I reached as a member of another panel that issued the memorandum decision in Badger's direct appeal, Badger v. State, 664 N.E.2d 423 (Ind.Ct.App.1996) ("Badger I").

In Badger I, I concurred with Judge Robertson's assessment that even though the imposition of consecutive sentences was…