MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be FILED regarded as precedent or cited before any Dec 19 2019, 8:42 am court except for the purpose of establishing CLERK the defense of res judicata, collateral Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals estoppel, or the law of the case. and Tax Court
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE William T. Myers Curtis T. Hill, Jr. Whitehurst & Myers Law Attorney General of Indiana Marion, Indiana Megan M. Smith Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Steven P. Wheeler, December 19, 2019 Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No. 19A-CR-991 v. Appeal from the Huntington Superior Court State of Indiana, The Honorable Jennifer E. Appellee-Plaintiff Newton, Judge Trial Court Cause No. 35D01-1709-F2-233
May, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-991 | December 19, 2019 Page 1 of 8 [1] Steven P. Wheeler appeals his fifty-two year sentence for Level 3 felony
aggravated battery, 1 Level 5 felony possession of a handgun without a license,2
Level 6 felony criminal organization activity, 3 Level 6 felony criminal
recklessness, 4 and being a habitual offender. 5 Wheeler argues his sentence is
inappropriate in light of the nature of his offenses and his character. We affirm.
Facts and Procedural History [2] Wheeler was the leader of the 2-1 F.A.T.A.L. gang. (Tr. Vol. II at 122.)
Wheeler authorized an “honor fight” between Monte Ness and Joseph
McAbee, both of whom were members of the gang. (Id. at 133.) The fight was
to settle a dispute between Ness and McAbee, and the fight was to take place at
Richard Voght’s home, where Ness lived.
[3] On September 26, 2017, before Wheeler and McAbee arrived at Voght’s home,
Ness told Voght about the fight. Voght and others in the residence moved to
the back porch to wait for Wheeler and his group. When Wheeler came onto
the property, Voght noticed Wheeler was carrying a gun. Voght heard a click
sound, similar to a round being racked in the chamber of a gun. Voght told
1 Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1.5(1) (2014). 2 Ind. Code § 35-47-2-1(e)(2)(B) (2017). 3 Ind. Code § 35-45-9-3(c) (2016). 4 Ind. Code § 35-42-2-2(b)(1)(A) (2014). 5 Ind. Code § 35-50-2-8(a) (2017).
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-991 | December 19, 2019 Page 2 of 8 Wheeler’s group to take any guns off his property. McAbee and Ness began
fighting in the street. Some of the people, including Voght’s wife, began to
gather near the fight. Shortly after the fight began, Ness stopped fighting
because McAbee was wearing brass knuckles. Ness fled to the back porch and
into the house.
[4] One of the men who arrived with Wheeler ran after Ness. Voght, who was still
on the back porch, threw the man from the porch and told everyone to leave.
Wheeler then shot his gun into the ground in Voght’s direction. Some people in
the area fled, but Wheeler’s wife attacked Voght’s wife and the two began to
fight in the street. Wheeler went toward the two women with his gun drawn.
Voght saw Wheeler approaching his wife and grabbed a wrench. Voght
intercepted Wheeler and swung the wrench at him. Wheeler shot Voght in the
shoulder. After shooting Voght, Wheeler and his group fled from the area.
Police arrested Wheeler shortly after he fled the scene.
[5] Voght suffered a chipped collar bone, shattered shoulder blade, a bruised lung,
and multiple severed nerves and tendons as a result of the gunshot wound.
Voght also lost his job as a result of the injury, and he still has a limited range of
motion and loss of grip strength.
[6] The State charged Wheeler with Level 3 felony aggravated battery inflicting
injury that causes protracted loss or impairment, Level 3 felony aggravated
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-991 | December 19, 2019 Page 3 of 8 battery that causes serious permanent disfigurement, 6 Level 5 felony battery
with a deadly weapon, Level 5 felony possession of a handgun without a
license, Level 5 felony criminal organization activity, and Level 6 felony
criminal recklessness. The State also alleged Wheeler was a habitual offender.
A jury found Wheeler guilty of Level 3 felony aggravated battery that causes a
protracted loss or impairment, Class A misdemeanor possession of a handgun
without a license, Level 5 felony criminal organization activity, and Level 6
felony criminal recklessness. Wheeler admitted being a habitual offender. The
court imposed an aggregate sentence of fifty-two years.
Discussion and Decision [7] Wheeler argues his sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature of his
offenses and his character. 7 Our standard for reviewing this issue is well settled.
We “may revise a 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.” Ind. Appellate Rule 7(B).
6 Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1.5(1) (2014). 7 Wheeler also alleges the trial court abused its discretion by failing to consider his self-defense as a mitigating factor. However, an “argument must include for each issue a concise statement of the applicable standard of review.” Ind. App. R. 46(A)(8)(b). Wheeler failed to provide a standard of review, and therefore the issue is waived. See Jackson v. State, 758 N.E.2d 1030, 1037 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001) (argument waived when appellant failed to cite appropriate authority). Waiver notwithstanding, the trial court was not required to consider Wheeler’s self-defense claim after the jury rejected it. See Wallace v. State, 725 N.E.2d 837, 840 (Ind. 2000) (the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it chose to not consider the defendant’s self-defense argument as mitigator after a jury rejected the claim).
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-991 | December 19, 2019 Page 4 of 8 “Although appellate review of sentences must give due consideration to the trial court’s sentence because of the special expertise of the trial bench in making sentencing decisions, Appellate Rule 7(B) is an authorization to revise sentences when certain broad conditions are satisfied.” Shouse v. State, 849 N.E.2d 650, 660 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006), trans. denied (citations and quotation marks omitted). “[W]hether we regard a sentence as appropriate at the end of the day turns on our sense of 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).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be FILED regarded as precedent or cited before any Dec 19 2019, 8:42 am court except for the purpose of establishing CLERK the defense of res judicata, collateral Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals estoppel, or the law of the case. and Tax Court
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE William T. Myers Curtis T. Hill, Jr. Whitehurst & Myers Law Attorney General of Indiana Marion, Indiana Megan M. Smith Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Steven P. Wheeler, December 19, 2019 Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No. 19A-CR-991 v. Appeal from the Huntington Superior Court State of Indiana, The Honorable Jennifer E. Appellee-Plaintiff Newton, Judge Trial Court Cause No. 35D01-1709-F2-233
May, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-991 | December 19, 2019 Page 1 of 8 [1] Steven P. Wheeler appeals his fifty-two year sentence for Level 3 felony
aggravated battery, 1 Level 5 felony possession of a handgun without a license,2
Level 6 felony criminal organization activity, 3 Level 6 felony criminal
recklessness, 4 and being a habitual offender. 5 Wheeler argues his sentence is
inappropriate in light of the nature of his offenses and his character. We affirm.
Facts and Procedural History [2] Wheeler was the leader of the 2-1 F.A.T.A.L. gang. (Tr. Vol. II at 122.)
Wheeler authorized an “honor fight” between Monte Ness and Joseph
McAbee, both of whom were members of the gang. (Id. at 133.) The fight was
to settle a dispute between Ness and McAbee, and the fight was to take place at
Richard Voght’s home, where Ness lived.
[3] On September 26, 2017, before Wheeler and McAbee arrived at Voght’s home,
Ness told Voght about the fight. Voght and others in the residence moved to
the back porch to wait for Wheeler and his group. When Wheeler came onto
the property, Voght noticed Wheeler was carrying a gun. Voght heard a click
sound, similar to a round being racked in the chamber of a gun. Voght told
1 Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1.5(1) (2014). 2 Ind. Code § 35-47-2-1(e)(2)(B) (2017). 3 Ind. Code § 35-45-9-3(c) (2016). 4 Ind. Code § 35-42-2-2(b)(1)(A) (2014). 5 Ind. Code § 35-50-2-8(a) (2017).
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-991 | December 19, 2019 Page 2 of 8 Wheeler’s group to take any guns off his property. McAbee and Ness began
fighting in the street. Some of the people, including Voght’s wife, began to
gather near the fight. Shortly after the fight began, Ness stopped fighting
because McAbee was wearing brass knuckles. Ness fled to the back porch and
into the house.
[4] One of the men who arrived with Wheeler ran after Ness. Voght, who was still
on the back porch, threw the man from the porch and told everyone to leave.
Wheeler then shot his gun into the ground in Voght’s direction. Some people in
the area fled, but Wheeler’s wife attacked Voght’s wife and the two began to
fight in the street. Wheeler went toward the two women with his gun drawn.
Voght saw Wheeler approaching his wife and grabbed a wrench. Voght
intercepted Wheeler and swung the wrench at him. Wheeler shot Voght in the
shoulder. After shooting Voght, Wheeler and his group fled from the area.
Police arrested Wheeler shortly after he fled the scene.
[5] Voght suffered a chipped collar bone, shattered shoulder blade, a bruised lung,
and multiple severed nerves and tendons as a result of the gunshot wound.
Voght also lost his job as a result of the injury, and he still has a limited range of
motion and loss of grip strength.
[6] The State charged Wheeler with Level 3 felony aggravated battery inflicting
injury that causes protracted loss or impairment, Level 3 felony aggravated
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-991 | December 19, 2019 Page 3 of 8 battery that causes serious permanent disfigurement, 6 Level 5 felony battery
with a deadly weapon, Level 5 felony possession of a handgun without a
license, Level 5 felony criminal organization activity, and Level 6 felony
criminal recklessness. The State also alleged Wheeler was a habitual offender.
A jury found Wheeler guilty of Level 3 felony aggravated battery that causes a
protracted loss or impairment, Class A misdemeanor possession of a handgun
without a license, Level 5 felony criminal organization activity, and Level 6
felony criminal recklessness. Wheeler admitted being a habitual offender. The
court imposed an aggregate sentence of fifty-two years.
Discussion and Decision [7] Wheeler argues his sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature of his
offenses and his character. 7 Our standard for reviewing this issue is well settled.
We “may revise a 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.” Ind. Appellate Rule 7(B).
6 Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1.5(1) (2014). 7 Wheeler also alleges the trial court abused its discretion by failing to consider his self-defense as a mitigating factor. However, an “argument must include for each issue a concise statement of the applicable standard of review.” Ind. App. R. 46(A)(8)(b). Wheeler failed to provide a standard of review, and therefore the issue is waived. See Jackson v. State, 758 N.E.2d 1030, 1037 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001) (argument waived when appellant failed to cite appropriate authority). Waiver notwithstanding, the trial court was not required to consider Wheeler’s self-defense claim after the jury rejected it. See Wallace v. State, 725 N.E.2d 837, 840 (Ind. 2000) (the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it chose to not consider the defendant’s self-defense argument as mitigator after a jury rejected the claim).
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-991 | December 19, 2019 Page 4 of 8 “Although appellate review of sentences must give due consideration to the trial court’s sentence because of the special expertise of the trial bench in making sentencing decisions, Appellate Rule 7(B) is an authorization to revise sentences when certain broad conditions are satisfied.” Shouse v. State, 849 N.E.2d 650, 660 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006), trans. denied (citations and quotation marks omitted). “[W]hether we regard a sentence as appropriate at the end of the day turns on our sense of 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). In addition to the “due consideration” we are required to give to the trial court’s sentencing decision, “we understand and recognize the unique perspective a trial court brings to its sentencing decisions.” Rutherford v. State, 866 N.E.2d 867, 873 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007).
Couch v. State, 977 N.E.2d 1013, 1017 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012), reh’g denied, trans.
denied. The appellant bears the burden of demonstrating his sentence is
inappropriate. Amalfitano v. State, 956 N.E.2d 208, 212 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011),
trans. denied. “Our review of the sentence 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.” Gleason v. State, 965
N.E.2d 702, 712 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012).
[8] When considering the nature of the offense, the advisory sentence is the starting
point for determining the appropriateness of a sentence. Anglemyer v. State, 868
N.E.2d 482, 494 (Ind. 2007), clarified on reh’g 875 N.E.2d 218 (Ind. 2007). A
Level 3 felony is punishable by a fixed term between three and sixteen years,
with the advisory sentence being ten years. Ind. Code § 35-50-2-5(b) (2014).
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-991 | December 19, 2019 Page 5 of 8 The trial court sentenced Wheeler to fourteen years; thus, he received a
sentence between the advisory and maximum sentences for aggravated battery.
A Level 5 felony is punishable by a fixed term between one and six years, with
the advisory sentence being three years. Ind. Code § 35-50-2-6(b) (2014). The
trial court sentenced Wheeler to three years; thus, he received the advisory
sentence for possessing a handgun without a license. A Level 6 felony is
punishable by a fixed term between six months and two-and-one-half years.
Ind. Code § 35-50-2-7(b) (2016). The trial court sentenced Wheeler to two years
each for criminal organization activity and criminal recklessness; thus, he
received above the advisory sentence but below the maximum for each of those
crimes. Wheeler was found to be a habitual offender and, based thereon, the
trial court enhanced his sentence for aggravated battery by eighteen years. The
trial court ordered the sentences for criminal recklessness and criminal
organization activity to be served concurrently, but to run consecutive to his
convictions for aggravated battery and possession of a handgun without a
license, giving him a total of fifty-two years in prison.
[9] Regarding the nature of the offense, Wheeler’s victim suffered serious injuries.
Voght suffered nerve damage, lost some of his arm’s range of motion, and has
reduced grip strength as a result of the shooting. Additionally, Wheeler created
this dangerous situation. As the leader of the 2-1 F.A.T.A.L. gang, Wheeler
authorized the honor fight and he brought a gun to the fight. Because of
Wheeler’s recklessness and poor decision making, we cannot hold an
aggravated sentence is inappropriate for his offenses. See Rowe v. State, 867
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-991 | December 19, 2019 Page 6 of 8 N.E.2d 262, 270 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (victim’s serious injury justified
aggravated sentence).
[10] When considering the character of the offender, one relevant fact is the
defendant’s criminal history. Johnson v. State, 986 N.E.2d 852, 857 (Ind. Ct.
App. 2013). Wheeler has an extensive criminal history, including a juvenile
record. 8 Wheeler is also the leader of the 2-1 F.A.T.A.L. gang. Wheeler
regularly uses drugs including alcohol, marijuana, bath salts, heroin, cocaine,
methamphetamine, prescription medications, and ecstasy. (App. Vol. II at
207.) Additionally, Wheeler has a propensity for violence, stating he “never
walks away from a fight.” (Id. at 214.)
[11] Given the nature of the offenses, i.e., the severity of Voght’s injuries, and the
character flaws of the offender, i.e., Wheeler’s repeated violation the law, we
cannot say Wheeler’s sentence is inappropriate. See Clark v. State, 26 N.E.3d
615, 619 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (defendant’s extensive criminal history showed
bad character and allowed for aggravated sentence), trans. denied.
Conclusion
8 Wheeler’s juvenile record includes adjudication for theft and being a minor in possession of alcohol. Wheeler’s adult record includes multiple misdemeanor convictions and felony convictions of: multiple counts of theft, receiving stolen property, possession of methamphetamine, and possession of a syringe.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-991 | December 19, 2019 Page 7 of 8 [12] In light of the nature of Wheeler’s offenses and his character, his fifty-two-year
sentence is not inappropriate. Accordingly, we affirm.
[13] Affirmed.
Najam, J., and Bailey, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-991 | December 19, 2019 Page 8 of 8