Summary
The Supreme Court of Indiana reviewed Kelli Jo Trusley's enhanced sentence for reckless homicide under Blakely v. Washington. It held that two aggravating circumstances—the victim's age and Trusley's position of trust—were properly established through admissions, while three other aggravators were improper under Blakely. The court remanded for resentencing and directed the trial court to allow the State to elect whether to prove additional aggravators to a jury.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the victim's age could be used as an aggravating circumstance under Blakely when the fact was acknowledged by defense counsel during the sentencing hearing.
- Whether Trusley's position of trust with the victim was properly established through admissions that she was the victim's day-care provider and had custody of him.
- Whether the remaining aggravating circumstances were supported by facts found in a manner consistent with Blakely.
- Whether the enhanced sentence could be affirmed after considering the two proper aggravators and the three mitigating circumstances.
Holdings
- Defense counsel's acknowledgment during the sentencing proceeding that the victim was less than twelve years old constituted an admission sufficient under Blakely to establish the victim's age as an aggravating circumstance.
- The position-of-trust aggravator was proper because Trusley admitted that she was the victim's day-care provider and had custody of him; the phrase described the legal significance of those admitted facts rather than constituting an additional, independently found fact.
- The aggravators that Trusley was in need of incarceration, that a sentence less than an enhanced sentence would depreciate the seriousness of the crime, and concerning the nature and circumstances of the crime were improperly considered because they were not supported by facts established in a manner required by Blakely.
- The enhanced sentence could not be affirmed because, after weighing the two properly established aggravators against the three substantial mitigating circumstances, the court could not say with confidence that the enhancement was justified.
Key quotations
“Under Blakely, a trial court in a determinate sentencing system such as Indiana's may enhance a sentence based only on those facts that are established in one of several ways” (925)
“Although it is frequently stated that "a single aggravator is sufficient to support an enhanced sentence," the existence of an aggravator does not relieve trial or appellate judges from the obligation to consider what weight to assign a particular aggravator and to balance the aggravators and mitigators.” (927)
Factual background
Kelli Jo Trusley provided day-care services for ten-month-old Brian Small. Small fell from a bed while in Trusley's care and died from injuries sustained in the fall. Trusley pleaded guilty to reckless homicide, and the sentencing court found five aggravating circumstances, including the victim's age and Trusley's position of trust, as well as three mitigating circumstances.
Procedural history
Trusley pleaded guilty to Class C felony reckless homicide after the State amended the indictment from neglect of a dependent. The trial court found five aggravating circumstances and three mitigating circumstances and imposed the maximum eight-year sentence, with two years suspended to probation. The Court of Appeals held that the aggravators were improper under Blakely and remanded for resentencing. The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer and independently reviewed the aggravators and sentence.
Remand instructions
The trial court must give the State the option to prove additional aggravating circumstances to a jury. If the State declines, the trial court must reconsider the appropriate sentence based on the two proper aggravators and the three mitigating circumstances identified by the trial court.