Opinion ID: 853674
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Instruction on Life Imprisonment Without Parole

Text: The defendant contends that the trial court erred in permitting the jury not to make a recommendation as to whether the defendant should receive life imprisonment without parole. He argues that when the jury was unable to reach a recommendation, the court should have required the jury to recommend against life imprisonment without parole. Instead, the trial court discharged the jury without receiving any jury recommendation and proceeded to sentence the defendant to life imprisonment without parole. The defendant cites Burris v. State, 465 N.E.2d 171 (Ind.1984), to support his argument that the jury does not have the option to decline to make a recommendation. In Burris, an instruction stated that if each juror found that the requisite circumstances necessary to support a recommendation for the death penalty were not present, the recommendation may be against the death penalty. Id. at 189. We held the instruction erroneous because, in the case of a unanimous vote against the death penalty, the jury has no optionit must report its recommendation against the death penalty. Id. However, Burris did not address the question of the jury's inability to reach any kind of recommendation, as occurred here. The defendant further argues that the jury was given conflicting instructions regarding whether it was required to recommend against life without parole in the event it could not reach a unanimous agreement. Sentencing Phase Preliminary Instruction No. 46 included the sentence: If you do not reach this unanimous decision [that a proven aggravating factor outweighs any mitigating factors found], you must recommend against sentencing Tracey Dunlop to life imprisonment without parole. Record at 223. In contrast, Sentencing Phase Final Instruction No. 55 stated in part: In order to return a recommendation you must all agree. Record at 235. The applicable statute provides: If a jury is unable to agree on a sentence recommendation after reasonable deliberations, the court shall discharge the jury and proceed as if the hearing had been to the court alone. IND.CODE § 35-50-2-9(f) (1993). The statute does not require the jury to recommend against life imprisonment when it cannot reach an agreement on the recommendation. Although the quoted portion of Preliminary Instruction No. 46 was inconsistent with the statute, the error favored the defendant. Any error on this issue was therefore harmless.