Kincaid v. State

Summary

The Supreme Court of Indiana granted transfer in Joseph Kincaid's appeal from convictions and maximum sentences for battery causing serious injuries to his infant son. The court summarily affirmed the Court of Appeals on certain trial issues and remanded for consideration of Kincaid's sentencing claims, including his claim under Blakely v. Washington.

Holdings

1. A criminal appellant's Blakely sentencing claim is not forfeited solely because the appellant did not raise a Blakely objection at the sentencing hearing, where the specific Blakely claim was raised in the initial brief on direct appeal.
2. The Court of Appeals must reconsider Kincaid's claims that the trial court improperly considered or weighed aggravating circumstances, failed to give proper weight to a mitigating circumstance, and imposed an inappropriate sentence in light of the offense and the offender's character, in connection with the Blakely claim.
3. The Court of Appeals' rulings rejecting Kincaid's insufficient-evidence claim and affirming the denial of permission to demonstrate how the child's injuries occurred were summarily affirmed.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Kincaid's Blakely sentencing claim was forfeited because he failed to object on Blakely grounds at the sentencing hearing.
2. Whether Kincaid's sentencing claims, including claims concerning aggravating and mitigating circumstances and the appropriateness of the sentence, should be considered on remand.
3. Which issues decided by the Court of Appeals should be summarily affirmed under Indiana Appellate Rule 58(A).

Disposition

remanded