Robert L. Holleman, Appellant-Petitioner,
State of Indiana, Appellee-Respondent
Appeal from the Lake Superior Court; The Honorable Samuel Cappas, Judge, The Honorable Natalie Bokota, Magistrate. 45G04-7611-CR-266.
FOR APPELLANT: Stephen T. Owens, Public Defender of Indiana; Jeffrey R. Wright, Deputy Public Defender, Indianapolis, Indiana.
FOR APPELLEE: Gregory F. Zoeller, Attorney General of Indiana; Frances Barrow, Deputy Attorney General, Indianapolis, Indiana.
May, Judge. Vaidik, C.J., concurs. Barnes, J., concurs with separate opinion.
[¶ 1] In 1976, Robert Holleman committed felony murder. He was sentenced to life in prison. Holleman had parole hearings in 1996, 2000, 2005, and 2010, and was denied release each time. Holleman underwent psychiatric and psychological assessments in 1997. The parole board did not seek a more current report on Holleman's psychological condition before the 2010 hearing, and a 2013 report indicated Holleman had progressed in some areas that were of concern in 1997. Holleman argues on appeal the parole board should have ordered an updated report and should have allowed Holleman to attend his public parole release hearing.
[¶ 2] As the errors Holleman alleges were harmless, we affirm.
Facts and Procedural History
[¶ 3] A prisoner subject to the law in effect when Holleman was sentenced is eligible to appear before the parole board after serving twenty years, and every five years thereafter. Ind. Code § 11-13-3-2(b)(3). Holleman appeared before the board four times after becoming eligible to do so.
[¶ 4] The regular parole hearings are referred to as " facility hearings," and the parole board also conducts " public hearings" every month at the Indiana Government Center and at two prisons. The public notice the parole board provided indicated Holleman's public hearing would be November 22, 2010, at 9:00 a.m., the same time and date as his facility hearing. The public hearing occurred immediately before the facility hearing.
[¶ 5] Holleman was notified that he would appear before the parole board on November 22, and he did. The notice did not indicate there would be two separate hearings, i.e., the facility hearing and the public hearing, and Holleman was not permitted to attend the public hearing. At the facility hearing, Holleman addressed the parole board, and the parole board asked him questions. The post-conviction court found that at the end of his hearing " Holleman was told by the Board that his parole was denied due to the nature and
circumstances of his offense."  (App. to Br. of ...