Michael Carr v. State of Indiana

Summary

The Indiana Supreme Court affirmed Michael Carr’s murder conviction and life-without-parole sentence. The court held that Carr failed to establish a Sixth Amendment fair-cross-section violation, forfeited his confrontation rights by threatening witnesses, and did not demonstrate reversible error in the admission of out-of-court statements or the jury instructions. The court also declined to revise the sentence under Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B).

Holdings

1. Carr did not establish a prima facie Sixth Amendment fair-cross-section violation because he failed to show that African Americans were systematically excluded from Wayne County jury venires on a regular basis.
2. The trial court properly admitted the statements because the witnesses were unavailable despite the State's reasonable efforts and Carr forfeited his confrontation rights by threatening to kill the witnesses and their families to prevent their testimony.
3. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting Smith's statement that Carr shot Lewis as an excited utterance.
4. The omission did not constitute fundamental error because Carr waived the issue and the jury received the substance of the instruction in the preliminary instructions and was told to consider the preliminary and final instructions together.
5. Carr's life-without-parole sentence was not inappropriate in light of the brutal and calculated nature of the murder and Carr's character, including his criminal history, parole status, threats, and disregard for the rule of law.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the composition of the venire violated Carr's Sixth Amendment right to a jury selected from a fair cross-section of the community.
2. Whether statements made by unavailable witnesses Vansickle and Smith to police were admissible after Carr forfeited his confrontation rights by threatening them and their families.
3. Whether Smith's statement to his sister that Carr shot Lewis was admissible as an excited utterance.
4. Whether the trial court's omission of a final instruction concerning the jury's authority under article 1, section 19 of the Indiana Constitution constituted fundamental error.
5. Whether Carr's life-without-parole sentence was inappropriate under Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B).

Disposition

affirmed