fact-intensive inquiry in Indiana

2026The restrictions, however, may apply if Searcy’s offenses qualify as an “episode of criminal conduct” under Indiana Code § 35- 50-1-2(c)-(d) (2020). [51] In this context, “episode of criminal conduct” means “offenses or a connected series of offenses that are closely related in time, place, and circumstance.” Ind. Code § 35-50-1-2 (b) (2020). “’Whether certain offenses constitute a ‘single episode of criminal conduct’ is a fact-intensive inquiry’ determined by the trial court.” Fix, 186 N.E.3d at 1143 (quoting Schlichter v. State, 779 N.E.2d 1155, 1157 (Ind. 2002)).

2026“Whether certain offenses constitute a single episode of criminal conduct is a fact-intensive inquiry determined by the trial court.” Fix, 186 N.E.3d at 1144 (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Schlichter v. State, 779 N.E.2d 1155, 1157 (Ind. 2002)).

2018“Whether certain offenses constitute a ‘single episode of criminal conduct’ is a fact-intensive inquiry to be determined by the trial court.” Slone v. State, 11 N.E.3d 969, 972 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Schlichter v. State, 779 N.E.2d 1155, 1157 (Ind. 2002)).

2015Whether multiple offenses “constitute a single episode of criminal conduct is a fact-intensive inquiry to be determined by the trial court.” Slone v. State, 11 N.E.3d 969, 972 (Ind.Ct.App.2014) (quoting Schlichter v. State, 779 N.E.2d 1155, 1157 (Ind.2002)).

2026“While ‘the ability to recount each charge without referring to the other’ offers ‘guidance on the question of whether a defendant’s conduct constitutes an episode of criminal conduct,’ we focus our analysis on ‘the timing of the offenses’ and ‘the simultaneous and contemporaneous nature of the crimes,’ if any.” Id. at 1144 (quoting Reed v. State, 856 N.E.2d 1189, 1200 (Ind. 2006)). [52] As to each count of possessing child pornography, the charging information, in pertinent part, alleged that “on or about December 20, 2022, David L.

2023“While ‘the ability to recount each charge without referring to the other’ offers ‘guidance on the question of whether a defendant’s conduct constitutes an episode of criminal conduct,’ we focus our analysis on ‘the timing of the offenses’ and ‘the simultaneous and contemporaneous nature of the crimes,’ if any.” Id. (quoting Reed v. State, 856 N.E.2d 1189, 1200 (Ind. 2006) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted)). [17] To the extent Detective Stewart testified that hundreds of videos were obtained from Jones’s residence and the trial court observed that thousands of images and videos

2018The trial court may consider “the timing of the offenses and the simultaneous and contemporaneous nature, if any, of the crimes.” Williams v. State, 891 N.E.2d 621, 631 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008). “[A]dditional guidance on the question can be obtained by considering whether the alleged conduct was so closely related in time, place, and circumstance that a complete account of one charge cannot be related without referring to the details of the other charge.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Reed v. State, 856 N.E.2d 1189, 1200 (Ind. 2006)). [19] Ultimately, Pumphrey’s argument that he

2018The trial court may consider “the timing of the offenses and the simultaneous and contemporaneous nature, if any, of the crimes.” Williams v. State, 891 N.E.2d 621, 631 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008). “[A]dditional guidance on the question can be obtained by considering whether the alleged conduct was so closely related in time, place, and circumstance that a complete account of one charge cannot be related without referring to the details of the other charge.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Reed v. State, 856 N.E.2d 1189, 1200 (Ind. 2006)). [19] Ultimately, Pumphrey’s argument that he

2025Indiana Code Section 35-50-1-2(b) directs us to examine whether the offenses “are closely related in time, place, and circumstance.” And our Courts have described an “episode” as “an occurrence or connected series of occurrences and developments which may be viewed as distinctive and apart although part of a larger or more comprehensive series[, Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 24A-CR-1824 | April 16, 2025 Page 10 of 17 including] the simultaneous robbery of seven individuals, the killing of several people with successive shots from a gun, [or] the successive burning of three pieces of pr

2025Indiana Code Section 35-50-1-2(b) directs us to examine whether the offenses “are closely related in time, place, and circumstance.” And our Courts have described an “episode” as “an occurrence or connected series of occurrences and developments which may be viewed as distinctive and apart although part of a larger or more comprehensive series[, Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 24A-CR-1824 | April 16, 2025 Page 10 of 17 including] the simultaneous robbery of seven individuals, the killing of several people with successive shots from a gun, [or] the successive burning of three pieces of pr

2023See generally Fix, 186 N.E.3d at 1144 (holding that whether certain offenses constitute a single episode of criminal conduct is a fact- intensive inquiry determined by the trial court); see also Estes v. State, 827 N.E.2d 27, 29 (Ind. 2005) (holding that “a court’s authority to order consecutive sentences was not affected by Blakely”) (citing Smylie v. State, 823 N.E.2d 679, 686 (Ind. 2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 976 , 126 S. Ct. 545 (2005)).

2023See generally Fix, 186 N.E.3d at 1144 (holding that whether certain offenses constitute a single episode of criminal conduct is a fact- intensive inquiry determined by the trial court); see also Estes v. State, 827 N.E.2d 27, 29 (Ind. 2005) (holding that “a court’s authority to order consecutive sentences was not affected by Blakely”) (citing Smylie v. State, 823 N.E.2d 679, 686 (Ind. 2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 976 , 126 S. Ct. 545 (2005)).

2023See generally Fix, 186 N.E.3d at 1144 (holding that whether certain offenses constitute a single episode of criminal conduct is a fact- intensive inquiry determined by the trial court); see also Estes v. State, 827 N.E.2d 27, 29 (Ind. 2005) (holding that “a court’s authority to order consecutive sentences was not affected by Blakely”) (citing Smylie v. State, 823 N.E.2d 679, 686 (Ind. 2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 976 , 126 S. Ct. 545 (2005)).

2023See generally Fix, 186 N.E.3d at 1144 (holding that whether certain offenses constitute a single episode of criminal conduct is a fact- intensive inquiry determined by the trial court); see also Estes v. State, 827 N.E.2d 27, 29 (Ind. 2005) (holding that “a court’s authority to order consecutive sentences was not affected by Blakely”) (citing Smylie v. State, 823 N.E.2d 679, 686 (Ind. 2005), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 976 , 126 S. Ct. 545 (2005)).

2012See, e.g., id. at 42-43; Erie, 622 N.E.2d at 520-23 ; Colley v. Ind. Farmers Mut.