mitigating and aggravating factors (Indiana) · Go Syfert
← Indiana issues

mitigating and aggravating factors in Indiana

23 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1987–2020 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Indiana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (7)

CaseFollowedCited
Wentz v. Stategreen
ind · 2002 · cited in 4 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2007–2020
2 sentences

2020Cf. Wentz v. State, 766 N.E.2d 351, 359 (Ind. 2002) (“the imposition of consecutive sentences here, where the trial court twice stated the mitigating and aggravating factors were in balance, was inappropriate”); Marcum, 725 N.E.2d at 864 (“because the trial court found the aggravating and mitigating circumstances to be in balance, there is no basis on which to impose consecutive terms”).

2018Id.; see also Wentz v. State, 766 N.E.2d 351, 359 (Ind. 2002) (holding imposition of consecutive sentences for murder, burglary, robbery, residential entry, and auto theft against at least five victims was inappropriate where the trial court twice stated the mitigating and aggravating factors were in balance and remanding for trial court to impose concurrent sentences).

34
Constance Anderson v. State of Indianagreen
indctapp · 2013 · cited in 2 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2016–2017
2 sentences

2017Spears v. State, 735 N.E.2d 1161, 1167 (Ind. 2000). 7 A trial court’s consideration of the mitigating and aggravating factors “may be evidenced in either the written order or in an oral sentencing statement.” Anderson v. State, 989 N.E.2d 823, 826 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (citing Gleason, 965 N.E.2d at 711 ), trans. denied.

2016However, a trial court’s consideration of the mitigating and aggravating factors “may be evidenced in either the written order or in an oral sentencing statement.” Anderson v. State, 989 N.E.2d 823, 826 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (citing Gleason, 965 N.E.2d at 711 ), trans. denied.

22
Anglemyer v. Stategreen
ind · 2007 · cited in 3 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2011–2016
2 sentences

2016“Under those circumstances, remand for resentencing may be appropriate if we cannot say with confidence that the trial court would have imposed the same Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 79A02-1507-CR-944| March 15, 2016 Page 5 of 9 sentence had it properly considered reasons that enjoy support in the record.” Id. at 491 . [10] Here, the trial court explicitly found that the mitigating and aggravating factors balanced, and it imposed the advisory sentences.

2015As mentioned above, “a trial court cannot now be said to have abused its discretion by failing to properly weigh [aggravating and mitigating] factors.” Anglemyer, 868 N.E.2d at 491 .

13
Marcum v. Stategreen
ind · 2000 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
1 sentence

2020Cf. Wentz v. State, 766 N.E.2d 351, 359 (Ind. 2002) (“the imposition of consecutive sentences here, where the trial court twice stated the mitigating and aggravating factors were in balance, was inappropriate”); Marcum, 725 N.E.2d at 864 (“because the trial court found the aggravating and mitigating circumstances to be in balance, there is no basis on which to impose consecutive terms”).

11
Spears v. Stategreen
ind · 2000 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
1 sentence

2017Spears v. State, 735 N.E.2d 1161, 1167 (Ind. 2000). 7 A trial court’s consideration of the mitigating and aggravating factors “may be evidenced in either the written order or in an oral sentencing statement.” Anderson v. State, 989 N.E.2d 823, 826 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (citing Gleason, 965 N.E.2d at 711 ), trans. denied.

11
Lopez v. Stategreen
indctapp · 2007 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009
1 sentence

2009However, "elven if a trial court has stated that aggravators and mitigators are in equipoise but then considers an additional freestanding aggravating factor to impose consecutive sentences, the initial finding of balance does not serve to invalidate the consecutive nature of the sentences." Lopez v. State, 869 N.E.2d 1254, 1259 (Ind.Ct.App.2007), trans. demed.

11
Dixon v. Stategreen
indctapp · 1997 · cited in 1 Indiana opinions naming this issue, 2002–2002
2 sentences

2002Mitchem, 685 N.E.2d at 678 ; Dixon v. State, 685 N.E.2d 715, 717 (Ind.Ct.App.1997).

2002Mitchem, 685 N.E.2d at 678 ; Dixon v. State, 685 N.E.2d 715, 717 (Ind.Ct.App.1997).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (13)

CaseCitedYears
Engelica E. Castillo v. State of Indiana green
ind · 2012
2 sentences

2020In Castillo, the prosecutor told the jury that in considering a sentence of life without parole, it should not compare the mitigating and aggravating factors when Indiana law expressly requires the jury to make that comparison. 974 N.E.2d at 468 (citing Ind. Code § 35-50-2-9 (l)).

2017In that case, the defendant was sentenced to life without parole after the prosecutor’s statement during the penalty phase that “told the jury not to compare the mitigating and aggravating factors” and “implored the jury to consider the defendant’s unsavory character” in a “colloquy on the defendant’s character [that] comprised nearly one-third of the prosecutor’s closing statements to the jury.” Id. at 468-69 .

32014–2020
Gleason v. State green
indctapp · 2012
2 sentences

2017Spears v. State, 735 N.E.2d 1161, 1167 (Ind. 2000). 7 A trial court’s consideration of the mitigating and aggravating factors “may be evidenced in either the written order or in an oral sentencing statement.” Anderson v. State, 989 N.E.2d 823, 826 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (citing Gleason, 965 N.E.2d at 711 ), trans. denied.

2016However, a trial court’s consideration of the mitigating and aggravating factors “may be evidenced in either the written order or in an oral sentencing statement.” Anderson v. State, 989 N.E.2d 823, 826 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (citing Gleason, 965 N.E.2d at 711 ), trans. denied.

22016–2017
Robinson v. State green
ind · 1985
2 sentences

1987Robinson v. State (1985), Ind., 477 N.E.2d 883, 886 .

1987Robinson v. State (1985), Ind., 477 N.E.2d 883, 886 .

21987–1987
Hoeppner v. State green
indctapp · 2009
1 sentence

2019Accordingly, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in imposing consecutive sentences. [37] Next, Jackson cites Hoeppner v. State, 918 N.E.2d 695 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009), to support his argument that the aggravators and mitigators are in equipoise, which we regard as a challenge to the weight afforded to the mitigating and aggravating factors.

12019–2019
Misztal v. State green
indctapp · 1993
1 sentence

2013We have said before, under a previous sentencing scheme that made more overt use of mitigating and aggravating factors, that there was no authority “for the proposition that a resentencing court does not have the discretion to consider mitigating and aggravating factors in light of the conviction on a lesser or different charge.” Misztal, 620 N.E.2d at 39 .

12013–2013
Cardwell v. State green
ind · 2008
1 sentence

2012In addition, Gonzalez was not satisfied with one drive-by 1 Gonzalez’s asserts that “under Appellate Rule 7(B), this court must undertake an independent review of the mitigating and aggravating factors.” Reply Br. at 6 (citing Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219 (Ind. 2008)).

12012–2012
Mitchem v. State green
ind · 1997
2 sentences

2002Mitchem, 685 N.E.2d at 678 ; Dixon v. State, 685 N.E.2d 715, 717 (Ind.Ct.App.1997).

2002Mitchem, 685 N.E.2d at 678 ; Dixon v. State, 685 N.E.2d 715, 717 (Ind.Ct.App.1997).

12002–2002
Jones v. State green
ind · 1996
1 sentence

1998Jones, 675 N.E.2d at 1087 ; Pruitt, 622 N.E.2d at 474; Henderson, 489 N.E.2d at 71.

11998–1998
Biggerstaff v. State green
ind · 1982
1 sentence

1993Appellant claims that a sentence may not be imposed on both felony murder and its underlying felony, citing Swafford v. State (1986), Ind., 498 N.E.2d 1188 and Biggerstaff v. State (1982), Ind., 432 N.E.2d 34 .

11993–1993
Swafford v. State green
ind · 1986
1 sentence

1993Appellant claims that a sentence may not be imposed on both felony murder and its underlying felony, citing Swafford v. State (1986), Ind., 498 N.E.2d 1188 and Biggerstaff v. State (1982), Ind., 432 N.E.2d 34 .

11993–1993
Henderson v. State green
ind · 1986
1 sentence

1991Id.; Henderson v. State (1986) Ind., 489 N.E.2d 68 .

11991–1991
Dumbsky v. State green
ind · 1987
2 sentences

1991Dumbsky v. State (1987), 508 N.E.2d 1274, 1278 .

1991Dumbsky v. State (1987), 508 N.E.2d 1274, 1278 .

11991–1991
Wilson v. State green
ind · 1984
1 sentence

1987Wilson v. State (1984), Ind., 465 N.E.2d 717 .

11987–1987

Statutes the citing opinions construe

IN § Ind. Code § 35-38-1-3 (5) IN § Ind. Code § 35-42-1-1 (5) IN § Ind. Code § 35-50-2-5 (4) IN § Ind. Code § 35-38-1-7.1 (3) IN § Ind. Code § 35-50-1-2 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

IL 65 (1990–2026) CA 27 (1979–2026) IN 23 (1987–2020) NJ 21 (1986–2025) WA 15 (2000–2021) OH 11 (2006–2020) GA 8 (2012–2026) PA 8 (2017–2025) NY 6 (2015–2025) MN 5 (2000–2016) CO 5 (1990–2025) RI 5 (2002–2003) ME 3 (1998–2023) FL 3 (1989–2014) AZ 3 (1994–2026) DC 3 (1989–2000) WV 2 (2006–2021) ID 2 (1998–2023) NC 2 (2021–2021) WI 2 (2010–2014) UT 2 (2015–2016) MD 2 (2021–2022)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check