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
Feb 17 2009, 9:41 am
of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

CLERK

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: LEANNA WEISSMANN Lawrenceburg, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: GREGORY F. ZOELLER Attorney General of Indiana GARY DAMON SECREST Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

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

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 15A01-0808-CR-386

APPEAL FROM THE DEARBORN SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable Sally Blankenship, Judge Cause No. 15D02-0805-CM-247

February 17, 2009 MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

BARNES, Judge

Case Summary William Allison appeals the sentence imposed after the revocation of his probation. We affirm. Issue Allison raises one issue, which we restate as whether the trial court abused its discretion when it ordered him to serve one year of his two year sentence following the revocation of his probation. Facts On May 13, 2008, Allison was charged with Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement, Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana, and Class A misdemeanor possession of paraphernalia. On May 20, 2008, Allison pled guilty as charged. On May 29, 2008, Allison was sentenced to one year on each count, with the resisting law enforcement sentence and the possession of marijuana sentence to be served consecutively, for a total sentence of two years. All but thirty days, which Allison had already served, was suspended, and Allison was placed on probation. On June 13, 2008 Allison tested positive for cocaine and marijuana. On June 17, 2008, the State alleged that Allison violated his probation. On July 18, 2008, Allison admitted to the probation violation, and his probation was revoked. The trial court ordered him to serve one year of his sentence and extended his probation for another year. Allison now appeals.

2

Analysis Allison claims that the trial court improperly ordered him to serve one year of his sentence after it revoked his probation. "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 Indiana Code Section 35-38-2-3). A trial court's sentencing decisions for probation violations are reviewable using the abuse of discretion standard. Id. "An abuse of discretion occurs where the decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances." Id. Upon the revocation of probation, the trial court may: (1) continue the person on probation, with or without modifying or enlarging the conditions; (2) extend the person's probationary period for not more than one year beyond the original probationary period; and (3) order execution of all or part of the sentence that was suspended at the time of initial sentencing. Ind. Code

Download William Allison v. State of Indiana.pdf

Indiana Law