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
Jul 28 2011, 8:29 am
of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

CLERK

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: CHRIS M. TEAGLE Muncie, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: GREGORY F. ZOELLER Attorney General of Indiana JANINE STECK HUFFMAN Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

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

No. 05A04-1010-CR-647

APPEAL FROM THE BLACKFORD CIRCUIT COURT The Honorable Dean A. Young, Judge Cause No. 05C01-0912-FB-84

July 28, 2011 MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION FRIEDLANDER, Judge

Johnnie Gustafson pleaded guilty to Possession of a Controlled Substance,1 a class D felony. Following his guilty plea the trial court sentenced Gustafson to three years imprisonment, the statutory maximum.2 Gustafson frames the single issue presented upon appeal in terms of the appropriateness of the sentence; yet, his argument addresses only the identification and weighing of the mitigating factors. Thus, we restate the issue presented upon appeal as follows: Did the trial court err in identifying and weighing mitigating circumstances? We affirm. On December 18, 2009, the State charged Gustafson with dealing in a schedule II controlled substance and dealing in marijuana. On August 31, 2010, Gustafson pleaded guilty to possession of a controlled substance pursuant to a plea agreement that left sentencing to the discretion of the trial court. In conjunction with his guilty plea, Gustafson admitted that on April 14, 2009, he knowingly possessed Hydrocodone, a schedule II controlled substance, contrary to Indiana law. At the sentencing hearing, Gustafson asked the court to take into consideration that he was employed by Five Star Roofing and his young age of twenty-two. In sentencing Gustafson, the trial court acknowledged his age, but emphasized the existence of three prior, unrelated felony convictions: class D felony residential entry, class D felony receiving stolen property, and class C felony burglary. Additionally, the trial court found that the State had

Ind. Code Ann.

Download 07281105ehf.pdf

Indiana Law