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.

FILED
Oct 15 2009, 8:39 am
of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

CLERK

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: A. FRANK GLEAVES III Marion County Public Defender Indianapolis, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: GREGORY F. ZOELLER Attorney General of Indiana KELLY A. MIKLOS Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
GERALD TROTTER, Appellant-Defendant, vs. STATE OF INDIANA, Appellee-Plaintiff. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 49A02-0904-CR-331

APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable Ruth D. Reichard, Senior Judge Cause No. 49G05-0304-PC-64812

October 15, 2009

MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

NAJAM, Judge

STATEMENT OF THE CASE Gerald Trotter appeals his sentence for Child Molesting, as a Class A felony, following a guilty plea. He presents a single issue for our review, namely, whether the trial court's imposition of ten years probation was an abuse of discretion. We affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On August 9, 2002, Trotter, who was living with his girlfriend at the time, molested S.K., a ten-year-old friend of Trotter's girlfriend's daughter. Trotter penetrated S.K.'s vagina with his finger. The State charged Trotter with three counts of child molesting, two as Class A felonies and one as a Class C felony. Trotter pleaded guilty to one count of child molesting, as a Class A felony, and the State dismissed the other charges. Trotter's plea agreement capped the executed portion of his sentence at twenty years, but otherwise left sentencing to the trial court's discretion. recommended that Trotter serve a minimum of three years probation. At sentencing, the trial court identified aggravators and mitigators and sentenced Trotter to forty years with twenty years executed and ten years probation. In 2009, Trotter filed a petition for permission to file a belated notice of appeal, which the trial court granted. This appeal ensued. DISCUSSION AND DECISION Trotter's sole contention on appeal is that the trial court abused its discretion when it imposed ten years probation. Trotter does not challenge the executed portion of his sentence. Because Trotter committed this crime in 2002, we review his sentence under
2

The State

the pre-Anglemyer statutory scheme. The determination of the appropriate sentence rests within the discretion of the trial court, and we will not reverse the trial court's determination absent a showing of manifest abuse of that discretion. Bacher v. State, 722 N.E.2d 799, 801 (Ind. 2000). The trial court's wide discretion extends to determining whether to increase the presumptive sentence, to impose consecutive sentences on multiple convictions, or both. Singer v. State, 674 N.E.2d 11, 13 (Ind. Ct. App. 1996). If the sentence imposed is authorized by statute, we will not revise or set aside the sentence unless it is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and the character of the offender. Ind. Appellate Rule 7(B); McCann v. State, 749 N.E.2d 1116, 1121 (Ind. 2001). The presumptive sentence for a Class A felony is thirty years, and the trial court is permitted to add up to twenty years for aggravating circumstances or subtract up to ten years for mitigating circumstances. See Ind. Code

Download Gerald Trotter v. State of Indiana.pdf

Indiana Law