Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

827 N.E.2d 33

Docket No. 71S05-0503-CR-130.

Nesbitt v. State

Terrease NESBITT, Appellant (Defendant below), v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee (Plaintiff below).

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided May 11, 2005.

Indiana Supreme Court · decided 2005-05-11

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently November 2005

2 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“those defendants who did not appeal their sentence at all will have forfeited any Blakely claim.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Aguilar v. State

Relies on Blakely v. Washington · Smylie v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2005-05-11

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Gregory Paul Kauffman, Indianapolis, IN, Attorney for Appellant.

¶2Steve Carter, Attorney General of Indiana, Monika Prekopa Talbot, Deputy Attorney General, Attorneys for Appellee.

¶3PER CURIAM.

¶4The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed Terrease Nesbitt's convictions for murder and two counts of Class A felony attempted murder, but remanded his case to the trial court for resentencing.

¶5

Background

¶6Terrease Nesbitt was convicted of murder, two counts of attempted murder, rape, and criminal deviate conduct. The trial court imposed an aggregate sentence of 175 years (55 years for murder, 30 years for one of the attempted murder counts, 50 years for the other attempted murder count, 20 years for rape, and 20 years for criminal deviate conduct).

¶7On appeal, Nesbitt's Appellant's Brief challenged his convictions for murder and attempted murder (he did not challenge his other convictions), but made no challenge to his sentence.[1] On November 24, 2004, the Court of Appeals affirmed his convictions in an unpublished memorandum decision and sua sponte remanded to the trial court for resentencing because, it held, Nesbitt's sentence violated Blakely v. Washington,542 U.S. 296, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004). Nesbitt v. State of Indiana, No. 71A05-0404-CR-200, slip op., 819 N.E.2d 548 (Ind.Ct.App. Nov. 24, 2004) (unpublished). The State filed a Petition To Transfer, which we granted on March 31, 2005.

¶8

Discussion

¶9In Smylie v. State,823 N.E.2d 679 (Ind. 2005), we set forth parameters under which an appellant can raise a Blakely claim for the first time on appeal even if the appellant did not preserve such a claim by making an appropriate objection in the trial court. However, we held that "those defendants who did not appeal their sentence at all will have forfeited any Blakely claim." Id. at 691. Nesbitt did not appeal *34 his sentence at all. Therefore, he is not entitled to relief under Smylie.

¶10

Conclusion

¶11We summarily affirm, see App. R. 58(A)(2), that portion of the Court of Appeals' opinion affirming Nesbitt's convictions for murder and attempted murder. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

¶12All justices concur.

NOTES

¶13[1] Nesbitt did not file a Reply Brief.

/827/ne2d/33 · .json · Public domain