Amanda R. Lee v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

• Court: Indiana Court of Appeals
• Decided: March 31, 2015
• Docket: 02A05-1409-CR-423
• Status: Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM DECISION Mar 31 2015, 9:36 am

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 ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Mark A. Thoma Gregory F. Zoeller Leonard, Hammond, Thoma & Terrill Attorney General of Indiana Fort Wayne, Indiana Angela N. Sanchez Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Amanda R. Lee, March 31, 2015

Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No. 02A05-1409-CR-423 v. Appeal from the Allen Superior Court The Honorable Frances C. Gull, State of Indiana, Judge Appellee-Plaintiff Cause No. 02D04-1403-FB-65

Bailey, Judge.

Case Summary [1] Amanda R. Lee (“Lee”) appeals the aggregate twelve-year sentence imposed

following her plea of guilty to Dealing in Methamphetamine, as a Class B

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A05-1409-CR-423| March 31, 2015 Page 1 of 6 felony,1 Maintaining a Common Nuisance2 and Dumping Controlled Substance

Waste, Class D felonies,3 and Possession of Paraphernalia, as a Class A

misdemeanor.4 She presents the sole issue of whether her sentence is

inappropriate. We affirm.

Facts and Procedural History [2] On April 14, 2014, without the benefit of a plea agreement, Lee pled guilty to

Dealing in Methamphetamine, Maintaining a Common Nuisance, Dumping

Controlled Substance Waste, and Possession of Paraphernalia. She was

allowed to participate in the Allen County Drug Program; successful

completion would have resulted in dismissal of the charges.

[3] However, on July 21, 2014, the trial court revoked Lee’s participation in the

alternative program. By that time, Lee had been evicted from Hope House,

where she had been living. She had failed to appear at a drug court compliance

hearing, she had twice tested positive for methamphetamine, and she had been

arrested on a new methamphetamine charge.

1 Ind. Code § 35-48-4-1.1. This statute has been revised, effective July 1, 2014, to provide that Dealing in Methamphetamine is now a Level 2, Level 3, Level 4, or Level 5 felony. We refer to the version of the statute in effect at the time of Lee’s offense. 2 I.C. § 35-48-4-13. The offense is now a Level 6 felony. 3 I.C. § 35-48-4-4.1. The offense is now a Level 6 felony. 4 I.C. § 35-48-4-8.3.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A05-1409-CR-423| March 31, 2015 Page 2 of 6 [4] On August 27, 2014, the trial court sentenced Lee to twelve years for Dealing in

Methamphetamine, two years each for Maintaining a Common Nuisance and

Dumping Controlled Substance Waste, and one year for Possession of

Paraphernalia. All sentences were to be served concurrently. This appeal

ensued.

Discussion and Decision [5] Upon conviction of a Class B felony, Lee was subject to a sentence of between

six years and twenty years, with ten years as the advisory term. I.C. § 35-50-2-

5.5 Upon conviction of a Class D felony, Lee was subject to a sentence of

between six months and three years, with one and one-half years as the

advisory term. I.C. § 35-50-2-7.6 Upon conviction of a Class A misdemeanor,

Lee was subject to a sentence of up to one year. I.C. § 35-50-3-2. When

imposing the aggregate twelve-year sentence, the trial court found Lee’s guilty

plea to be mitigating. As aggravators, the trial court recognized Lee’s criminal

history and failure to benefit from prior rehabilitative measures.

[6] The authority granted to this Court by Article 7, § 6 of the Indiana Constitution

permitting appellate review and revision of criminal sentences is implemented

through Appellate Rule 7(B), which provides: “The Court may revise a

5 This statutory provision was modified, effective July 1, 2014, to include the penalty for Level 3 felonies. 6 This statutory provision was modified, effective July 1, 2014, to include the penalty for Level 6 felonies.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A05-1409-CR-423| March 31, 2015 Page 3 of 6 sentence authorized by statute if, after due consideration of the trial court’s

decision, the Court finds that the sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature

of the offense and the character of the offender.” In performing our review, we

assess “the culpability of the defendant, the severity of the crime, the damage

done to others, and myriad other factors that come to light in a given case.”

Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219, 1224 (Ind. 2008). The principal role of such

review is to attempt to leaven the outliers. Id. at 1225. A defendant ‘“must

persuade the appellate court that his or her sentence has met th[e]

inappropriateness standard of review.”’ Anglemyer v. State, 868 N.E.2d 482, 494

(Ind. 2007) (quoting Childress v. State, 848 N.E.2d 1073, 1080 (Ind. 2006)).

[7] As to the nature of Lee’s offenses, she engaged in the manufacture of

methamphetamine; the manufacture took place in a rented residence

maintained by Lee; Lee disposed of methamphetamine waste; and she

possessed drug paraphernalia.

[8] Lee admitted to her guilt of the foregoing offenses, and this admission reflects

favorably upon her character. See Cotto v. State, 829 N.E.2d 520, 526 (Ind.

2005). Although Lee claims to be bi-polar, she reported to the pre-sentence

investigator that she was not taking medication for a mental health disorder.

[9] By the age of twenty-five, Lee had already compiled a substantial criminal

history. She also has a significant history of failure to benefit from

rehabilitative efforts short of incarceration.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A05-1409-CR-423| March 31, 2015 Page 4 of 6 [10] Lee had a single juvenile delinquency adjudication, for Possession of

Marijuana. She violated the terms of her informal adjustment and was placed

on juvenile probation. As an adult, Lee compiled two prior felony convictions

and four prior misdemeanor convictions. In 2007, she committed Battery and

Invasion of Privacy, as Class A misdemeanors. She was placed on

unsupervised probation, but her sentence was modified and she was ordered to

serve a sixty-day sentence.

[11] In 2008, she committed Invasion of Privacy as a Class D felony. Her

suspended sentence was revoked and she was ordered to serve two years on

home detention. Her home detention placement was revoked, and she was

committed to the Indiana Department of Correction. Also in 2008, Lee

committed a second offense of Invasion of Privacy, as a Class D felony. The

suspended sentence was revoked and she was incarcerated. In 2012, Lee

committed Domestic Battery, as a Class A misdemeanor. In 2013, Lee was

convicted of Disorderly Conduct, as a Class B misdemeanor.

[12] Upon Lee’s April 14, 2014 plea, she was initially placed into a drug court

program. One week later, she missed a scheduled drug screen. On April 23

and April 25, 2014, Lee tested positive for methamphetamine. She was

unsuccessfully discharged from Hope House due to non-compliance with

program rules. She failed to appear in court on June 16, 2014 and was arrested.

On July 11, 2014, Lee was arrested on a new Dealing in Methamphetamine

charge.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A05-1409-CR-423| March 31, 2015 Page 5 of 6 Having reviewed the matter, we conclude that the trial court did not

impose an inappropriate sentence under Appellate Rule 7(B), and the sentence

does not warrant appellate revision. Accordingly, we decline to disturb the

sentence imposed by the trial court.

[13] Affirmed.

Riley, J., and Barnes, J., concur.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A05-1409-CR-423| March 31, 2015 Page 6 of 6