Preview:

Pursuant to Ind.Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral estoppel, or the law of the case.

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: CARA SCHAEFER WIENEKE Wieneke Law Office, LLC Plainfield, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: GREGORY F. ZOELLER Attorney General of Indiana ERIC P. BABBS Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

FILED
Feb 02 2012, 9:10 am
of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
ERIC C. ROACH, Appellant-Defendant, vs. STATE OF INDIANA, Appellee-Plaintiff. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

CLERK

No. 62A01-1108-CR-367

APPEAL FROM THE PERRY CIRCUIT COURT The Honorable M. Lucy Goffinet, Judge Cause No. 62C01-1105-FA-253

February 2, 2012 MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION VAIDIK, Judge

Case Summary Eric C. Roach argues that his advisory sentence of ten years executed for Class B felony dealing in methamphetamine is inappropriate "given his character." Appellants Br. p. 1. Finding that Roach has failed to persuade us that his sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and his character, we affirm. Facts and Procedural History On April 30, 2011, an officer with the Cannelton Police Department arrested Daniel Crowley for possession of methamphetamine. Crowley told police that twentyseven-year-old Roach from Kentucky sold him the methamphetamine. Police located Roach later that night sitting in his truck in a parking lot in Tell City, Indiana. Police found a large amount of methamphetamine, marijuana, three guns, pseudoephedrine, lithium batteries, Alprazolam, and a police radio on Roachs person and in his truck. A seventeen-year-old girl was also with Roach in his truck. methamphetamine. The State charged Roach with nine counts: Count 1: Class A felony dealing in methamphetamine (three grams or more), Count 2: Class B felony dealing in cocaine, Count 3: Class C felony possession of methamphetamine (while possessing a firearm), Count 4: Class C felony possession of chemical reagents or precursors with intent to manufacture controlled substances (while possessing a firearm), Count 5: Class D felony possession of a controlled substance, Count 6: Class D felony maintaining a common nuisance, Count 7: Class A misdemeanor taking a minor into a common nuisance, Count 8: Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana, and Count 9: Class B misdemeanor 2 Roach admitted selling

unlawful use of a police radio. Roach and the State entered into a plea agreement whereby Roach pled guilty to Amended Count 1: dealing in methamphetamine as a Class B felony. In exchange, the State dismissed the remaining eight charges. Sentencing was left to the trial courts discretion. A sentencing hearing was held. Six people, including four family members,

testified on Roachs behalf, but Roach did not testify. Evidence was presented that Roach had four prior convictions, all misdemeanors from Kentucky. The trial court sentenced Roach to the advisory term of ten years, all executed. The court explained: Im going to find that there were firearms in possession at the time of the arrest, firearms in possession specifically when he was dealing in methamphetamine. However, the Court will note that the State did not pursue this charge. Im going to show that he does have a history of [criminal] behavior, however minor. The Court is going to note that hes been on probation before and he has continued to reoffend. He came into our County. He came into our State to deal in methamphetamine. He had a juvenile girl in the car when he was arrested. He profited from anothers addiction. He does not believe he has a drug problem, says that he only used the meth whenever he was selling, and in fact in his PSI he denies alcohol or drug dependency. He stated in his PSI that he has no significant debt and lived rent-free with his mother so this was for his pure profit. I believe he is remorseful for this act, however, I believe he is remorseful because he got caught. Tr. p. 67-68. Roach now appeals his sentence.

Discussion and Decision Roach contends that his ten-year sentence is inappropriate "[c]onsidering his character." Appellants Br. p. 4. He therefore asks us to "reduce the executed portion of his sentence." Id. at 7; see also id. at 3 ("A short amount of prison time, coupled with a lengthy probation period, would be a more appropriate sentence in this case."). 3

Our rules authorize revision of a sentence "if, after due consideration of the trial courts decision, the Court finds that the sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and the character of the offender." Ind. Appellate Rule 7(B). "[A] defendant must persuade the appellate court that his or her sentence has met this inappropriateness standard of review." Childress v. State, 848 N.E.2d 1073, 1080 (Ind. 2006). The principal role of Rule 7(B) review "should be to attempt to leaven the outliers, and identify some guiding principles for trial courts and those charged with improvement of the sentencing statutes, but not to achieve a perceived ,,correct result in each case." Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219, 1225 (Ind. 2008). Whether a sentence is

inappropriate ultimately turns on the culpability of the defendant, the severity of the crime, the damage done to others, and a myriad of other factors that come to light in a given case. Id. at 1224. The question under Rule 7(B) is not whether another sentence is more appropriate; rather, the question is whether the sentence imposed is inappropriate. King v. State, 894 N.E.2d 265, 268 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008). A person who commits a Class B felony shall be imprisoned for a fixed term between six and twenty years, with the advisory sentence being ten years. Ind. Code

Download Eric C. Roach v. State of Indiana.pdf

Indiana Law