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: HAROLD E. AMSTUTZ Lafayette, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: STEVE CARTER Attorney General of Indiana GARY DAMON SECREST Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
ROBERT EVAN WRIGHT, Appellant-Defendant, vs. STATE OF INDIANA, Appellee-Plaintiff. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 79A02-0611-CR-1006

APPEAL FROM THE TIPPECANOE CIRCUIT COURT The Honorable Donald L. Daniel, Judge Cause No. 79C01-0510-FC-45

May 31, 2007

MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

CRONE, Judge

Case Summary Robert Evan Wright appeals his twelve-year sentence for two counts of class C felony forgery. We affirm. Issues Wright raises two issues, which we restate as follows: I. Whether the trial court abused its discretion in its finding and balancing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances; and Whether Wright's sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature of his offenses and his character. Facts and Procedural History On September 9, 2005, Wright took a blank check from a married couple's checkbook without their knowledge and made it payable to himself in the amount of $3,000.00. He then endorsed the check and cashed it at a Bank One branch in Lafayette. On September 14, 2005, Wright took another blank check from the same couple's checkbook and made it payable to himself in the amount of $5,000.00. Again, he endorsed the check and cashed it at the same Bank One location. Wright apparently used the money to purchase drugs. 1 On October 3, 2005, the State charged Wright with two counts of class C felony forgery, two counts of class C felony fraud on a financial institution, and four counts of class D felony theft. On May 19, 2006, five days before his scheduled trial date, Wright pled guilty to two counts of class C felony forgery, and the State dismissed the remaining charges in this case as
1

II.

During his statement at sentencing, Wright told the trial court, "...[M]y drug habit just continued to get worse and worse to the point where obviously not caring [sic] about how I got the drugs or the money to obtain them which is sad." Tr. at 20.

2

well as two pending charges in another case. 2 On June 9, 2006, the trial court sentenced him to six years for each count, with the terms to be served consecutively. On July 31, 2006, Wright filed a pro se motion for appeal. The trial court denied the motion as untimely filed. At Wright's request, the trial court appointed counsel for Wright. On October 30, 2006, he filed a motion for permission to file a belated notice of appeal, which was granted on October 31, 2006. This appeal ensued. Discussion and Decision I. Aggravating and Mitigating Circumstances Wright alleges that the trial court abused its discretion in its finding and balancing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances. Several months prior to Wright's offenses, our legislature amended Indiana's sentencing scheme. The changes were effective April 25, 2005. As amended, Indiana Code Section 35-50-2-6 states in relevant part: "A person who commits a Class C felony shall be imprisoned for a fixed term of between two (2) and eight (8) years, with the advisory sentence being four (4) years." Indiana Code Section 35-38-1-3 provides that if a trial court finds aggravators and/or mitigators at sentencing, then it must make a statement of its "reasons for selecting the sentence it imposes." However, a trial court may impose any sentence authorized by statute or permissible under the Indiana Constitution "regardless of the presence or absence of aggravating circumstances or mitigating circumstances." Ind. Code

Download Robert Evan Wright v. State of Indiana.pdf

Indiana Law