Court Opinion

ID: 9706016
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 01:29:48.866638+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:22:18.457791
License: Public Domain

SULLIVAN, Judge,
concurring.
I concur but write separately with respect to the matter of Ryle's probation status vis-a-vis Blakely v. Washington.
I agree, as determined by the majority, that Ryle effectively admitted that he was on probation at the time he committed the voluntary manslaughter for which he was here convicted. Were it not for this admission, I could not agree that, upon the authority of Bledsoe v. State, 815 N.E.2d 507 (Ind.Ct.App.2004), trans. pending, the fact of being on probation does not implicate Blakely. As suggested in Teeters v. State, 817 N.E.2d 275 (Ind.Ct.App.2004), tramns.pending, the fact of a defendant being on probation might well be a matter outside the confines of the documents setting forth the defendant's prior criminal record. If so, and if the probation status has not been admitted by defendant, the fact of probation would seem to be a matter of fact necessary for the jury to determine.