Court Opinion

ID: 9714461
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 05:38:09.420598+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:26.253430
License: Public Domain

GIVAN, Justice,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion in this case in that they have vacated the sentencing of appellant and remanded the case to the trial court for consideration of mitigating cireumstances.
Experience in deciding the many eriminal cases that come before this Court each year demonstrates that even the most heinous of criminals quite often have friends and relatives who testify as to their kind and loving nature, their artistic abilities, philanthropic works, etc.
*687A trial judge is quite often bombarded by these obviously biased and exaggerated comments concerning a defendant's nature. When a judge is faced with the hard reality of an extremely brutal crime, it is unreasonable to expect him to enter into a long dissertation as to why he does not believe the impassioned plea of a grieving mother or the naive pontifications of biased friends.
I believe the trial judge in this case was not obligated to explain why he had chosen to find no mitigating circumstances. See Gaddie v. State (1991), Ind., 566 N.E.2d 535. I would affirm the trial court.