For victims involved in domestic violence proceedings, the continuous crime doctrine is a legal concept that must be understood. The continuous crime doctrine stems from a category in Indiana’s double jeopardy clause. Indiana’s double jeopardy clause prohibits convicting a defendant of two or more distinct chargeable crimes when they constitute the same offense, it also prohibits convicting a defendant multiple times for the same continuous offense. While this may seem like a complex legal term, this is crucial to understanding in a domestic violence proceeding. This blog explores the continuous crime doctrine and how it can impact domestic violence proceedings.
The continuous crime doctrine defines those instances where a defendant’s conduct amounts only to a single chargeable crime and prevents the State from charging a defendant twice for the same continuous offense. Further, the doctrine provides that actions that are sufficient in themselves to constitute separate criminal offenses may be so compressed in terms of time, place, singleness of purpose, and continuity of action as to constitute a single transaction. The continuous crime doctrine is distinguishable from the double jeopardy implications because it defines those instances where a defendant’s conduct only amounts to a single chargeable crime. The Indiana Courts have utilized the continuous crime doctrine in their decisions when it comes to domestic violence proceedings. One case in particular has shined light on how the continuous crime doctrine and domestic violence overlap in Indiana.
Gomez v. State, 56 N.E.3d 697 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016), the Court reversed the trial court’s decision of convicting a man with three counts of domestic battery and affirmed just one count of domestic battery. Gomez and his ex-wife engaged in a domestic dispute at one of their rental properties, to which Gomez became violent with his ex-wife in pursuit of trying to get her out of the rental property. Throughout Gomez’s attempt to get his ex-wife out of the rental property, which was about ten minutes, the State charged him with four counts of domestic battery. On appeal, the Indiana Court of Appeals decided that “the acts alleged in Counts II, III, IV were sufficiently compressed in terms of time, place, singleness of purpose, and continuity of action so as to constitute a single transaction for purposes of the continuous crime doctrine.” Because Gomez’s acts against his ex-wife were within a limited amount of time, location, and purpose he was only convicted of one count of domestic violence.
The continuous crime doctrine is a complex legal principle that you should be aware of when bringing forth a domestic violence proceeding. The need for experienced legal counsel will help you bring your case forward with the proper understanding of how and if this legal doctrine can implicate your outcome. Ciyou & Associates, P.C. has skilled and experienced attorneys that can help you navigate your domestic violence proceeding in Indiana. This blog post was written by attorneys at Ciyou & Associates, P.C. and this blog is not intended as specific legal advice or solicitation of services, as this is an advertisement.
