Opinion ID: 853362
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: facts

Text: The record indicates that on October 4, 1997, Defendant and two juvenile accomplices robbed a gun store in Greenwood, Indiana. Defendant drove the two juveniles to the gun store, and after walking in, told the clerk, Stephen Stapleton, to put his hands up. While Stapleton had his hands up, Defendant shot him multiple times without provocation. Stapleton died as a result of these gunshots. Several days after the killing, the State charged Defendant with the knowing murder of Stapleton. [1] Indiana law authorizes the State to seek a sentence of death or of life without parole by alleging, on a page separate from the rest of the charging instrument, the existence of at least one of the aggravating circumstances listed in the statute governing the imposition of such sentences. [2] In May, 1998, the State made the requisite filing to seek a death sentence, alleging that Defendant intentionally killed Stapleton while committing a robbery. (Intentionally killing while committing robbery is an aggravating circumstance listed in the death penalty statute. [3] ) The State also amended the charging information to add felony murder, [4] conspiracy to commit robbery, and robbery counts. [5] In October, 1999, the State made the requisite filing to seek a sentence of life without parole, again alleging as the aggravating circumstance that Defendant intentionally killed Stapleton while committing a robbery. At the same time, Defendant and the State entered into and filed a plea agreement. Under its terms, Defendant pled guilty to Felony Murder and admitted the charged aggravating circumstance of intentionally killing while committing robbery. [6] In exchange, the State dropped all other charges and agreed not to seek the death penalty. The plea agreement stipulated that [t]he parties may present evidence relevant to the aggravating and/or mitigating circumstances listed in the statute governing a sentence of life without parole. (Id.) The parties also agreed that the trial court could decide to sentence Defendant either to life without parole or to a term of years. (Id.) Unlike a case in which the State seeks a sentence of life without parole that goes to trial, there is no sentencing phase before a jury when a defendant pleads guilty to the underlying murder. Rather, sentencing is conducted entirely by the court. [7] Under the statute, the court is required to find that the State has proved beyond a reasonable doubt at least one of the aggravating circumstances set forth in the statute. [8] The court must then weigh the aggravating circumstance or circumstances so proven against any mitigating circumstances that it finds to exist. [9] A sentence of life without parole is only permissible if the court finds that the aggravating circumstance or circumstances outweigh any mitigating circumstances. [10] At the sentencing hearing in this case, the State presented witnesses and evidence regarding the details of the crime and Defendant presented evidence in an effort to demonstrate the existence of mitigating circumstances. The trial court subsequently sentenced Defendant to life in prison without parole.