Deane v. State

Summary

The Indiana Supreme Court affirms Stephen M. Deane’s convictions for murder and attempted murder and his enhanced, consecutive sentences. The court holds that the prosecutor’s references to Deane’s post-Miranda request for counsel did not constitute fundamental error, particularly because the references were not directed at exploiting the exercise of a constitutional right and defense counsel had introduced the subject. The court also holds that lack of remorse and Deane’s substantial criminal history supported the sentencing decision.

Holdings

1. The prosecutor's references to Deane's request for counsel did not constitute fundamental error requiring reversal because the comments were directed to the timing and context of Deane's inquiry about his family's condition, were not directed at exploiting the exercise of his constitutional right, and the defense had already introduced testimony concerning the request.
2. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by considering Deane's lack of remorse as an aggravating circumstance where the finding was based on his demeanor, disdain for the legal system, affronts to the prosecutor, and disrespect for the proceedings, rather than solely on his denial of guilt.
3. The enhanced and consecutive sentences were supported by the aggravating circumstances, particularly Deane's substantial prior criminal history, even assuming the trial court gave excessive weight to lack of remorse.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the prosecutor's closing-argument references to Deane's post-Miranda request for counsel constituted fundamental error requiring reversal despite the lack of a trial objection.
2. Whether the trial court improperly considered lack of remorse as an aggravating circumstance.
3. Whether the aggravating circumstances supported the enhanced murder sentence and consecutive sentences.

Disposition

affirmed