Schiro v. State, No. 1084S423

Docket NºNo. 1084S423
Citation479 N.E.2d 556
Case DateJune 28, 1985
CourtSupreme Court of Indiana

Page 556

479 N.E.2d 556
Thomas N. SCHIRO, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Indiana, Appellee.
No. 1084S423.
Supreme Court of Indiana.
June 28, 1985.

Page 558

Susan K. Carpenter, Public Defender, Frances Watson Hardy, Deputy Public Defender, Indianapolis, for appellant.

Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen., Joseph N. Stevenson, Deputy Atty. Gen., Indianapolis, for appellee.

GIVAN, Chief Justice.

Appellant was convicted by a jury of Murder While Committing or Attempting to Commit Rape. The trial court sentenced appellant to death. The conviction and death sentence were affirmed by this Court on direct appeal. Schiro v. State (1983), Ind., 451 N.E.2d 1047 (DeBruler, J., and Prentice, J., dissenting as to sentence), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 104 S.Ct. 510, 78 L.Ed.2d 699. Appellant's Petition for Post-Conviction Relief was denied. He now appeals.

The facts of this case were set out at length in the opinion on direct appeal. Schiro, supra at 1049-50. They will not be repeated here.

Appellant raises two issues in this appeal: whether the post-conviction court erred in finding the death penalty was proper in light of his allegations that the trial judge was biased and improperly considered appellant's behavior during the course of the trial in his sentencing determination; and whether the post-conviction court erred in finding appellant was not denied effective assistance of counsel.

In reviewing the denial of a post-conviction petition, this Court does not weigh evidence nor judge the credibility of witnesses. Owens v. State (1984), Ind., 464 N.E.2d 1277. The petitioner must satisfy this Court that the evidence as a whole leads unmistakably to a decision in his favor. Bean v. State (1984), Ind., 467 N.E.2d 671.

Appellant's first issue is divided into four subissues. In the first three subissues, which address the trial court's consideration of his behavior during the trial, appellant alleges: 1) that the information could not be relied upon because it was not introduced into evidence; 2) that because he did not testify, reliance on observations of his behavior violated his Fifth Amendment rights; and 3) that he was denied his right to effective assistance of counsel because defense counsel was not afforded an opportunity to comment on facts influencing the sentencing decision. The fourth subissue

Page 559

concerns a comment made by the trial judge which appellant argues demonstrates the judge was biased and therefore unable to objectively render the sentencing determination.

Upon review of appellant's direct appeal, this Court found the trial court's original findings pertaining to the sentencing did not set out clearly and properly the court's reasons for imposing the death penalty. Schiro, supra at 1056. We ordered the court to make written findings setting out the aggravating circumstance proved beyond a reasonable doubt and the mitigating circumstances, if any, as specified in Ind.Code Sec. 35-50-2-9. Id. In its nunc pro tunc entry the court found that the aggravating circumstance set out in Ind.Code Sec. 35-50-2-9(b)(1) was proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

The court then stated that it found no mitigating circumstances, and addressed each of the possible mitigating circumstances delineated in Ind.Code Sec. 35-50-2-9. In reference to the statutory mitigating circumstances concerning a defendant's mental or emotional condition, subsection (c)(2), and impairment of a defendant's capacity to appreciate the criminality of his conduct, subsection (c)(6), the court made the following finding:

"This Court personally observed the Defendant, while the jury was present, making continual rocking motions, which did not stop throughout the trial except when the jury left the Courtroom. In the Court's outer chambers, out of the presence of the jury, in the eight days of trial, the Court frequently observed the Defendant sitting calmly and not rocking. It is apparent to the Court that this may well have influenced and misled the jury in its recommendation."

Appellant contends this finding constitutes the court's primary basis for sentencing him to death after the jury had recommended the death penalty not be imposed. He argues that "obviously" the court based its death penalty judgment on its observations, representing an "absolute denial of due process."

We cannot agree with appellant's conclusory assertion that the court based its judgment on observations of his behavior. The court, as prescribed by the death penalty statute, found the existence of an aggravating circumstance proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Schiro, supra at 1058. It addressed each of the possible mitigating circumstances delineated in the statute. Regarding appellant's mental state, the court made additional findings which cited testimony by psychiatric experts and evidence of appellant's attempt to conceal his crime. Id. at 1059. While the court's observations were certainly germane to its consideration of the jury's recommendation, it cannot be said its finding that appellant may have misled the jury constituted the basis for imposition of the death penalty.

Neither can we agree with appellant's contention that consideration of his behavior was impermissible because it was information not admitted into evidence. It is axiomatic that a trial court, within its discretion, can consider a defendant's behavior in the courtroom, regardless of whether the jury is present. The court can properly consider such "non-evidentiary" information as the pre-sentence investigation report and its perception of a defendant's remorse or lack thereof. We find no authority to support the conclusion appellant would have us draw, that a judge in a capital case is precluded from considering a defendant's behavior during the course of the trial if evidence of such behavior is not admitted into evidence.

Appellant nevertheless argues that under Gardner v. Florida (1977), 430 U.S. 349, 97 S.Ct. 1197, 51 L.Ed.2d 393, the death penalty is invalid. In that case a Florida jury recommended a life sentence. The trial judge, as in the instant case, overrode the jury's recommendation and sentenced the defendant to death. In imposing the death penalty the judge stated that his decision was based in part on a presentence report which contained a confidential portion not available to the defense.

Page 560

Id. at 353, 97 S.Ct. at 1202, 51 L.Ed.2d at 398-99.

The United States Supreme Court vacated the death sentence. The Court concluded the petitioner was denied due process because the death sentence was imposed, at least in part, on the basis of information which the petitioner had no opportunity to deny or explain. Id. at 362, 97 S.Ct. at 1207, 51 L.Ed.2d at 404. The Court found that because the confidential portion of the report was not part of the record on appeal, the Florida Supreme Court was unable to consider "the total record" in its review. Id. at 361, 97 S.Ct. at 1206, 51 L.Ed.2d at...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 practice notes
  • Schiro v. Clark, No. 91-1509
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • September 8, 1992
    ...was denied effective assistance of counsel. Again, the Indiana Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the trial court. Schiro v. State, 479 N.E.2d 556 (1985) ("Schiro II "), and the Supreme Court of the United States again denied Schiro's petition for writ of certiorari to vacate the death ......
  • People v. Wesley, Docket No. 77844
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Michigan
    • August 25, 1987
    ...Danis, 129 Ill.App.3d 664, 668-670, 84 Ill.Dec. 798, 472 N.E.2d 1194 (1984); State v. Farnham, 479 A.2d 887 (Me, 1984); Schiro v. State, 479 N.E.2d 556 (Ind, 1985); Mahla v. State, 496 N.E.2d 568, 575 (Ind, 1986); Guenther v. State, 495 N.E.2d 788 (Ind, 1986), aff'd in part and vacated in p......
  • Schiro v. Clark, Civ. No. S83-588.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court of Northern District of Indiana
    • December 26, 1990
    ...hearing on May 29, 1984, and the Supreme Court of Indiana affirmed the denial of post-conviction relief as reported in Schiro v. State., 479 N.E.2d 556 (Ind.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1036, 106 S.Ct. 1247, 89 L.Ed.2d 355 (1986) (Brennan and Marshall, J., When the second appeal got to the......
  • Minnick v. Anderson, No. 3:99 CV 157 AS.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court of Northern District of Indiana
    • August 22, 2000
    ...State, 451 N.E.2d 1047 (Ind.1983), cert. denied, Schiro v. Indiana, 464 U.S. 1003, 104 S.Ct. 510, 78 L.Ed.2d 699 (1983), Schiro v. State, 479 N.E.2d 556 (Ind.1985) (PCR denied), cert. denied Schiro v. Indiana, 475 U.S. 1036, 106 S.Ct. 1247, 89 L.Ed.2d 355 (1986), Schiro v. State, 533 N.E.2d......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
14 cases
  • Schiro v. Clark, No. 91-1509
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • September 8, 1992
    ...was denied effective assistance of counsel. Again, the Indiana Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the trial court. Schiro v. State, 479 N.E.2d 556 (1985) ("Schiro II "), and the Supreme Court of the United States again denied Schiro's petition for writ of certiorari to vacate the death ......
  • People v. Wesley, Docket No. 77844
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Michigan
    • August 25, 1987
    ...Danis, 129 Ill.App.3d 664, 668-670, 84 Ill.Dec. 798, 472 N.E.2d 1194 (1984); State v. Farnham, 479 A.2d 887 (Me, 1984); Schiro v. State, 479 N.E.2d 556 (Ind, 1985); Mahla v. State, 496 N.E.2d 568, 575 (Ind, 1986); Guenther v. State, 495 N.E.2d 788 (Ind, 1986), aff'd in part and vacated in p......
  • Schiro v. Clark, Civ. No. S83-588.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court of Northern District of Indiana
    • December 26, 1990
    ...hearing on May 29, 1984, and the Supreme Court of Indiana affirmed the denial of post-conviction relief as reported in Schiro v. State., 479 N.E.2d 556 (Ind.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1036, 106 S.Ct. 1247, 89 L.Ed.2d 355 (1986) (Brennan and Marshall, J., When the second appeal got to the......
  • Minnick v. Anderson, No. 3:99 CV 157 AS.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court of Northern District of Indiana
    • August 22, 2000
    ...State, 451 N.E.2d 1047 (Ind.1983), cert. denied, Schiro v. Indiana, 464 U.S. 1003, 104 S.Ct. 510, 78 L.Ed.2d 699 (1983), Schiro v. State, 479 N.E.2d 556 (Ind.1985) (PCR denied), cert. denied Schiro v. Indiana, 475 U.S. 1036, 106 S.Ct. 1247, 89 L.Ed.2d 355 (1986), Schiro v. State, 533 N.E.2d......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT