Phillip Evans v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

CourtIndiana Court of Appeals
DecidedMay 4, 2018
Docket84A01-1709-CR-2116
StatusPublished

This text of Phillip Evans v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) (Phillip Evans v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Phillip Evans v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.), (Ind. Ct. App. 2018).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), FILED this Memorandum Decision shall not be May 04 2018, 10:17 am regarded as precedent or cited before any CLERK court except for the purpose of establishing Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals the defense of res judicata, collateral and Tax Court

estoppel, or the law of the case.

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Cara Schaefer Wieneke Curtis T. Hill, Jr. Wieneke Law Office, LLC Attorney General of Indiana Brooklyn, Indiana Matthew B. Mackenzie Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Phillip Evans, May 4, 2018 Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No. 84A01-1709-CR-2116 v. Appeal from the Vigo Superior Court State of Indiana, The Honorable Michael J. Lewis, Appellee-Plaintiff. Judge Trial Court Cause No. 84D06-1401-MR-51

Barnes, Judge.

Case Summary [1] Phillip A. Evans appeals his sixty-year sentence for murder. We affirm.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 84A01-1709-CR-2116 | May 4, 2018 Page 1 of 7 Issue [2] The sole issue before us is whether Evans’s sentence is inappropriate in light of

the nature of the offense and his character.

Facts [3] Pamela Jones and her boyfriend, Devlin Decker, planned to host a party in

Terre Haute on December 31, 2013. That evening, they picked up Decker’s

uncle, Evans, and his roommate, Joshua Thomas. They stopped briefly at a gas

station so Evans could withdraw money from an ATM. Evans returned to the

car and angrily accused Thomas, whom he had earlier allowed access to his

bank card, of withdrawing money from his account. Thomas denied doing so.

They all returned to Jones’s home and drank until they were intoxicated.

[4] Later, Thomas began to flirt with Jones. Decker and Thomas argued and

began to fight. The fight spilled outside. Evans, who was still angry with

Thomas, followed Decker and Thomas outside. Evans watched as Decker

kicked and punched Thomas repeatedly. Jones’s next door neighbors, Eric and

Diana Goucher, heard the commotion, looked outside, and saw Thomas with

“his hands up . . . saying I’m sorry, please stop[.]” Tr. p. 179. Decker knocked

Thomas off the porch onto the concrete surface below. When Thomas rose to

his hands and knees, Decker lifted a wooden table weighing approximately fifty

pounds and slammed it down onto his head. Decker then walked back into

Jones’s house. When Thomas attempted to re-enter the house, Evans pinned

him against the house, “kind of looked around and took a step back and hit

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 84A01-1709-CR-2116 | May 4, 2018 Page 2 of 7 him.” Id. at 26. Thomas’s body went limp and “fell onto [Evans].” Id. at 27.

Both men crashed off the porch with Evans landing on top of Thomas. The

noise brought Decker running from the house; he jumped off the porch, and

“started to stomp [Thomas] in the head and Phillip Evans started to kick

[Thomas] in the side.” Id. at 29. Thomas was unconscious.

[5] Diana Goucher dialed 911 “telling them they need[ed] to hurry up cause

[Decker and Evans were] gonna hurt [Thomas] bad.” Id. at 181. “[T]hey were

kicking him so hard that, in the head and stuff [that she] looked away at one

point.” Id. Decker and Evans stopped their attack on Thomas when they “saw

[the Gouchers] looking out the window” at them. Id. Decker enlisted a newly-

arrived party guest, Camron Wormser, to help him move Thomas. As

Wormser helped drag Thomas, Decker resumed kicking Thomas’s head.

[6] Officers of the Terre Haute Police Department arrived at the scene. Decker ran

into Jones’s house in a panic and told her that he had stabbed Thomas. Soon

thereafter, Evans came into the house and told Jones and Wormser’s girlfriend,

Courtney Dailey, that he too had stabbed Thomas. Medical responders

transported Thomas to the hospital, where he died. An autopsy revealed

multiple abrasions to his head and torso as well as three stab wounds, one of

which had perforated his heart, killing him.

[7] Evans told Detective Darren Long of the Terre Haute City Police Department

that he had called 911; that four members of the Aryan Brotherhood had

attacked Thomas; and that they had knocked Evans unconscious when he tried

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 84A01-1709-CR-2116 | May 4, 2018 Page 3 of 7 to render aid. The Gouchers contradicted Evans’s account and advised that

Evans was “not a witness” but a participant in the attack on Thomas. Id. at 95.

[8] On January 8, 2014, the State charged Evans with murder and Class B felony

aggravated battery, later filing an additional information alleging that he was an

habitual offender. He was tried by a jury and found guilty as charged on May

11, 2017. On August 16, 2017, the trial court imposed a sixty-year sentence for

the murder conviction and enhanced that sentence by thirty years because

Evans was an habitual offender. He now appeals his sixty-year sentence.1

Analysis [9] Evans argues that his sixty-year sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature

of the offense and his character. Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B) provides that we

may revise a sentence authorized by statute if, after due consideration of the

trial court’s decision, we find that the sentence is inappropriate in light of the

nature of the offenses and the character of the offender. When considering

whether a sentence is inappropriate, we need not be “extremely” deferential to

a trial court’s sentencing decision. Rutherford v. State, 866 N.E.2d 867, 873 (Ind.

Ct. App. 2007). Still, we must give due consideration to that decision. Id. We

also understand and recognize the unique perspective a trial court brings to its

sentencing decisions. Id. Under this rule, the burden is on the defendant to

1 Evans does not challenge the thirty-year habitual offender enhancement.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 84A01-1709-CR-2116 | May 4, 2018 Page 4 of 7 persuade the appellate court that his or her sentence is inappropriate. Childress

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

[10] The principal role of Rule 7(B) review “should be to attempt to leaven the

outliers, and identify some guiding principles for trial courts and those charged

with improvement of the sentencing statutes, but not to achieve a perceived

correct result in each case.” Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219, 1225 (Ind.

2008). We “should focus on the forest—the aggregate sentence—rather than

the trees—consecutive or concurrent, number of counts, or length of the

sentence on any individual count.” Id. When reviewing the appropriateness of

a sentence under Rule 7(B), we may consider all aspects of the penal

consequences imposed by the trial court in sentencing the defendant, including

whether a portion of the sentence was suspended. Davidson v. State, 926 N.E.2d

1023, 1025 (Ind. 2010).

[11] Under Indiana Code Section 35-50-2-3, a person convicted of murder “shall be

imprisoned for a fixed term of between forty-five (45) and sixty-five (65) years,

with the advisory sentence being fifty-five (55) years.” Evans argues that his

sixty-year sentence is inappropriate because “Decker was the primary

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Davidson v. State
926 N.E.2d 1023 (Indiana Supreme Court, 2010)
Cardwell v. State
895 N.E.2d 1219 (Indiana Supreme Court, 2008)
Childress v. State
848 N.E.2d 1073 (Indiana Supreme Court, 2006)
Rutherford v. State
866 N.E.2d 867 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Phillip Evans v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/phillip-evans-v-state-of-indiana-mem-dec-indctapp-2018.