There's a good chance you're reading this for someone else — a son, a daughter, a husband, a parent who's locked up and, as far as you can tell, out of road. You've heard the phrase "post-conviction relief" and want to know what it actually means. Or maybe the trial's behind you, the appeal didn't land, and you're wondering if anything is left.
Post-conviction relief is one of the most misunderstood corners of the system. It's powerful and it's narrow at the same time. A second look, not a second trial. Here's what it is, who it's for, and how it works in Indiana.
PCR and a Direct Appeal Are Not the Same Thing
Start here, because almost everyone mixes these up. A direct appeal asks a higher court to comb the trial record for legal errors, and it usually has to be filed within 30 days of the judgment. It's limited to what's already in the record. (Our piece on what happens after you lose a trial covers appeals in detail.)
Post-conviction relief — "PCR" — is a different animal. It's a separate civil case, filed after the direct appeal is over or after the time to appeal has run. It's how you raise certain constitutional claims and facts that aren't in the trial record, the kind you can only prove with new testimony or new evidence. In Indiana, it runs on Post-Conviction Rule 1.
What PCR Can Reach
PCR exists to fix serious legal and constitutional problems that trial and appeal couldn't. The usual grounds:
- Ineffective assistance of trial or appellate counsel
- Newly discovered evidence that was not available at trial
- Prosecutorial misconduct that undermined a fair trial
- A sentence that was not authorized by law
- A guilty plea that was not entered knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently
What PCR Can't Reach
The limits matter just as much. PCR is not a do-over in front of a friendlier judge, and it's not for arguments that belonged on direct appeal. As a rule, you can't use it to:
- Re-argue the evidence because you don't like the verdict
- Raise something already decided on direct appeal
- Raise something that could have gone up on appeal but didn't (usually treated as waived)
Knowing which side of that line a problem falls on is most of the work — and getting it wrong can sink a real claim.
The Most Common Ground: Ineffective Assistance
Ineffective assistance of counsel is far and away the most frequent basis for PCR. Because it usually takes proof from outside the record — often the trial lawyer's own testimony — it can't go up on direct appeal and lands in a PCR petition instead.
Indiana uses the two-part Strickland v. Washington test: the attorney's performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and there's a reasonable probability the result would have been different. Our guide to proving ineffective assistance of counsel in Indiana digs into that.
Newly Discovered Evidence
Sometimes something surfaces after trial that nobody could have put on at the time — a witness who recants, a lab result, proof pointing somewhere else. Newly discovered evidence can support a PCR petition, but the standard is strict, and the enumerated test has real teeth. We break it down in newly discovered evidence in Indiana post-conviction cases.
How a PCR Case Actually Moves
A post-conviction case has its own track, separate from the original prosecution:
- The verified petition. It starts when the petitioner files a verified petition laying out the specific grounds. Because successive petitions are so limited, this is the moment to raise every known claim.
- The State responds. The State answers, and the court runs it much like a civil lawsuit.
- The hearing. If the claims warrant it, the court holds an evidentiary hearing — witnesses, documents, the works. The petitioner carries the burden by a preponderance of the evidence.
- The decision. The judge issues written findings of fact and conclusions of law, granting or denying relief. Either side can appeal.
Because it's a civil proceeding, the rules differ from a criminal trial, and the burden sits with the petitioner, not the State. The Public Defender of Indiana takes many PCR cases for people who are incarcerated and can't afford counsel; private counsel often makes sense for people who aren't incarcerated or whose cases are complicated. For a step-by-step walkthrough — from the verified petition through the hearing and appeal — see our Indiana Post-Conviction Rule 1 guide.
How Long It Takes
No honest lawyer gives you a clean number here. PCR cases routinely run many months and often more than a year from filing to decision. It depends on how complex the claims are, how much investigating they need, the court's calendar, and whether there's a hearing. Because it moves slowly, starting early — while records still exist and witnesses can still be found — matters more than people expect.
Sentence Modification Is a Different Tool (IC 35-38-1-17)
People mix these up constantly. A request to modify a sentence under Indiana Code § 35-38-1-17 doesn't claim anything went wrong with the conviction. It just asks the court to shorten or restructure a lawful sentence. PCR challenges the legality of the conviction or sentence itself. Different requirements, different process, different goal. Sometimes the right answer is one, sometimes the other, sometimes neither. For how modification actually works — including the prosecutor-consent rules and what courts weigh — see our article on sentence modification under IC 35-38-1-17.
Post-Conviction Relief in Central Indiana
We handle PCR across Central Indiana, including Madison County (Anderson), Marion County (Indianapolis), Hamilton County (Noblesville), Hancock County (Greenfield), Shelby County (Shelbyville), Delaware County (Muncie), and Henry County (New Castle). A PCR petition is generally filed in the court where the conviction happened. Many of the people who reach out are family members carrying this for someone who's incarcerated, and we get how heavy that is. Wherever the case started, the earlier the review begins, the more there usually is to work with.
Common Questions
Have Questions About Your Case?
Post-conviction relief has strict procedural prerequisites and limited chances to get it right. Attorney Emilee Hammond can review the record, identify viable grounds, and explain what is realistic in your situation.