Christi Lee Scott v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) ( 2017 )


Menu:
  • MEMORANDUM DECISION
    Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D),
    this Memorandum Decision shall not be                               FILED
    regarded as precedent or cited before any                       Jul 18 2017, 9:26 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
    Karen M. Heard                                           Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
    Vanderburgh County                                       Attorney General of Indiana
    Public Defenders Office
    Christina D. Pace
    Evansville, Indiana                                      Deputy Attorney General
    Indianapolis, Indiana
    IN THE
    COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
    Christi Lee Scott,                                       July 18, 2017
    Appellant-Defendant,                                     Court of Appeals Case No.
    82A01-1612-CR-2939
    v.                                               Appeal from the
    Vanderburgh Circuit Court
    State of Indiana,                                        The Honorable Kelli E. Fink
    Appellee-Plaintiff                                       Magistrate
    Trial Court Cause No.
    82C01-1603-F4-1792
    Kirsch, Judge.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 82A01-1612-CR-2939 |July 18, 2017     Page 1 of 4
    [1]   Christie Lee Scott entered a plea of guilty to Burglary as a Level 4 felony 1 and
    Theft as a Level 6 felony.2 She was sentenced to concurrent sentences six years
    and two years. Contending that her sentence is inappropriate in light of the
    nature of her offenses and her character, she now appeals. Concluding that her
    sentence is not inappropriate, we affirm.
    Facts and Procedural History
    [2]   On March 25, 2016, Scott knocked on the door of the residence of Tim
    Crabtree and asked him for money or a cigarette. Crabtree declined. Scott left,
    but returned a short time later accompanied by Jermon Weathers. Crabtree felt
    uncomfortable and retrieved his gun before answering the door. Scott and
    Weathers pushed past Crabtree and entered the house. When they would not
    leave, Crabtree left and went to a neighbor’s house where he called 911. Police
    responded and apprehended Scott and Weathers a short time later in possession
    of a laptop computer, cell phone and loose change that they had taken from
    Crabtree’s home.
    [3]   Scott pleaded guilty to Burglary and Theft. The trial court found that the
    aggravating factor of her criminal history outweighed the mitigating factors of
    1
    See 
    Ind. Code § 35-43-2-1
    .
    2
    See 
    Ind. Code § 35-43-4-2
    (a).
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 82A01-1612-CR-2939 |July 18, 2017   Page 2 of 4
    accepting responsibility and pleading guilty, expressing remorse and taking
    steps to seek help.
    Discussion and Decision
    [4]   Article 7, Sections 4 and 6 of the Indiana Constitution authorizes independent
    appellate review and revision of criminal sentences. Trainor v. State, 
    950 N.E.2d 352
    , 355 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011), trans. denied. This authority is implemented by
    Indiana Appellate Rule 7 (B) which provides, “The Court 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
    or the character of the offender.” The defendant bears the burden of persuading
    this court that his or her sentence is inappropriate. Childress v. State, 
    848 N.E. 1073
    , 1080 (Ind. 2006).
    [5]   Looking at the nature of her offense, we see that she knew her victim in this
    case, that he had helped her in the past, and that, when he declined to give her
    money or a cigarette on this occasion, she returned with a companion and
    forced their way into the victim’s residence. They stole a laptop computer, a
    cell phone, lottery tickets, and loose change.
    [6]   Looking at her character, we see that she has an extensive criminal history
    which started in 1991. Included in that history are four felony convictions and
    twenty-nine misdemeanor convictions.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 82A01-1612-CR-2939 |July 18, 2017   Page 3 of 4
    [7]   Scott has not met her burden of persuading us that her six-year sentence is
    inappropriate in light of the nature of her offenses or her character.
    Accordingly, the sentence is affirmed.
    [8]   Affirmed.
    Mathias, J., and Altice, J., concur.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 82A01-1612-CR-2939 |July 18, 2017   Page 4 of 4
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 82A01-1612-CR-2939

Filed Date: 7/18/2017

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 7/18/2017