126, 176. La' Mont-rell Thomas testified that Fisher had played around with a gun before and therefore did not believe Fisher was serious about shooting anyone when he pointed the weapon at Kizmond. Id. at 219. As a result when Thomas saw Fisher with the handgun, Thomas continued to look "at the menu." Id. at 222-23. Thomas also testified that once Kizmond was struck, Fisher seemed "[s]tunned like that [sic] he did it or something. . .." Id. at 223. Although rejecting Fisher's defense of accident, which would thereby have completely absolved Fisher of any liability for his conduct, the jury could have returned a conviction of reckless homicide instead of murder depending on how it weighed and credited all of the evidence. See Nordstrom v. State, 627 N.E.2d 1380, 1383 (Ind.Ct.App.1994) (<HOLDING>), trams. denied. As such, the trial court's
holding that territorial jurisdiction must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt holding that any fact that increases a sentence beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury holding reckless homicide proven beyond a reasonable doubt where defendant shot wife at close range allegedly believing gun would not discharge holding that facts that increase the maximum sentence a defendant faces must be proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt holding that facts regarding prior convictions need not be charged in an indictment nor proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt