Legal Opinion · Dissent

Gardiner v. State

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided March 31, 2009No. 08A02-0810-CR-874Published

1DissentBrown, Judge

I respectfully dissent from the majority's conclusion that the trial court lacked the ability to suspend Gardiner's sentence below the minimum sentence. I do not find the Model Penal Code or Hutcherson v. State, 441 N.E.2d 962 (Ind.1982), cited by the majority, to be determinative or persuasive here. In fact, Indiana courts have allowed similar relief under the habitual offender statutes. See, eg., Coble v. State, 500 N.E.2d 1221, 1223 (Ind.1986) (holding that a defendant sentenced as an habitual offender who later successfully challenges one of his predicate offenses may have his habitual…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Coble v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Olinger v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1986
  3. State v. JonesIndiana Court of Appeals · 2004
  4. Hutcherson v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1982

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

Powered by the Exa API