Bruno v. State

Summary

The Indiana Supreme Court affirmed Michael Bruno's convictions for murder and criminal recklessness arising from a shooting into an occupied residence. The court held that sufficient evidence supported the convictions and found no fundamental error concerning the verdict forms. It remanded for resentencing because consecutive sentences for criminal recklessness exceeded the statutory limitation and the murder and conspiracy convictions should have been merged based on a single overt act.

Holdings

1. The evidence was sufficient to support Bruno's convictions for murder and criminal recklessness because the evidence showed that he and others knowingly fired weapons into an occupied residence, and Bruno admitted firing into the residence.
2. The allegedly confusing headings on the voluntary-manslaughter and reckless-homicide verdict forms did not constitute fundamental error.
3. The aggregate consecutive terms for Bruno's three Class C felony criminal-recklessness convictions could not exceed ten years, the presumptive sentence for a Class B felony, because criminal recklessness was not designated as a crime of violence.
4. The trial court should have merged Bruno's murder conviction and conspiracy-to-commit-murder conviction because both convictions rested on a single overt act.

Questions Presented

1. Whether sufficient evidence supported Bruno's convictions for murder and criminal recklessness, including under an accomplice-liability theory.
2. Whether the verdict forms for voluntary manslaughter and reckless homicide were confusing and constituted fundamental error despite the absence of a trial objection.
3. Whether consecutive sentences for the three criminal-recklessness convictions exceeded Indiana's statutory limitation on consecutive terms.
4. Whether imposing convictions and sentences for both murder and conspiracy to commit murder was impermissible because the convictions rested on a single overt act.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded