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
May 06 2010, 8:26 am
of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

CLERK

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: C. ROBERT RITTMAN Marion, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: GREGORY F. ZOELLER Attorney General of Indiana MELLISICA K. FLIPPEN Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
LAUNDLE BLACK, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Appellant-Defendant, vs. STATE OF INDIANA, Appellee-Plaintiff.

No. 27A05-0912-CR-681

APPEAL FROM THE GRANT CIRCUIT COURT The Honorable Mark E. Spitzer, Judge Cause No. 27C01-0011-CF-67

May 6, 2010 MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

BARNES, Judge

Case Summary Laundle Black appeals the trial court's order directing him to serve the entirety of his previously-suspended sentence after he admitted to violating his probation. We affirm. Issue The sole issue is whether the trial court abused its discretion in ordering Black to serve the entirety of his previously-suspended sentence. Facts On November 17, 2000, the State charged Black with Class B felony attempted arson and alleged that he was an habitual offender. On August 31, 2001, Black pled guilty to Class B felony attempted arson, and the State agreed to dismiss the habitual offender allegation. On October 22, 2001, the trial court sentenced Black to a term of twenty years, with sixteen executed and four years suspended to probation. The trial court also permitted Black to serve his sentence in the Grant County Jail rather than the Department of Correction. On February 1, 2008, the trial court granted Black's motion for modification of his sentence, allowing him to enter a community transition program. On January 30, 2009, however, the trial court terminated Black's participation in the program because of his repeated violation of program rules. Black's probationary period began on June 20, 2008. Among other terms of probation, Black could not commit any new criminal offense and could not consume 2

alcohol. On January 29, 2009, the State filed a petition seeking to revoke Black's probation, alleging that on January 25, 2009, he had committed the offense of operating a vehicle with a blood alcohol content exceeding .15% in Grant County. The State later filed an addendum to the petition to revoke, alleging that on April 22, 2009, he was convicted of the offenses of operating while intoxicated and driving while suspended in Madison County. At the probation revocation hearing on July 31, 2009, Black admitted that he had been convicted of all these offenses. The trial court revoked Black's

probation and ordered him to serve the previously-suspended four-year portion of his sentence. Black now appeals. Analysis "Probation is a matter of grace left to trial court discretion, not a right to which a criminal defendant is entitled." Prewitt v. State, 878 N.E.2d 184, 188 (Ind. 2007). "The trial court determines the conditions of probation and may revoke probation if the conditions are violated." Id. (citing Ind. Code

Download 05061001mpb.pdf

Indiana Law