Benjamin M. Daniels v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) ( 2019 )

MEMORANDUM DECISION
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), FILED
this Memorandum Decision shall not be Nov 20 2019, 6:23 am
regarded as precedent or cited before any
court except for the purpose of establishing CLERK
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
Angela N. Sanchez
Assistant Section Chief
Criminal Appeals
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Benjamin M. Daniels, November 20, 2019
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
19A-CR-1534
v. Appeal from the Henry Circuit
Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable Kit C. Dean Crane,
Appellee-Plaintiff. Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
33C02-1704-F6-177
Najam, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1534 | November 20, 2019 Page 1 of 7
Statement of the Case
[1] Benjamin M. Daniels appeals his sentence following his convictions for two
counts of battery against a public safety official, as Level 6 felonies. Daniels
raises one issue for our review, namely, whether his sentence is inappropriate in
light of the nature of the offenses and his character. We affirm.
Facts and Procedural History
[2] In early 2017, Daniels was an inmate in the Henry County Jail. On January 17,
Henry County Jail Correctional Officer Jeremy Brown entered Daniels’ cell
block to speak with the assistant jail commander. While Officer Brown was
talking with the assistant commander, Daniels, who was in the common area of
the cell block, reached his arms through the bars and “grabbed at” Officer
Brown. Tr. Vol. II at 25. Officer Brown asked Daniels to stop, but Daniel
repeatedly grabbed at Officer Brown. Daniels also threatened to “stomp”
Officer Brown’s “brains out.” Id. at 74. Officer Brown then told Daniels to
return to his individual cell. Daniels refused and, instead, argued with Officer
Brown.
[3] At that point, Officer Brown entered the common area and again ordered
Daniels to his cell. When Daniels did not comply, Officer Brown placed his
hand on Daniels’ shoulder in order to direct Daniels toward his cell. Daniels
then pulled away and struck Officer Brown in the face. Officer Brown
responded “in kind,” and the two started “wrestling around.” Id. at 87. Other
officers responded to assist Officer Brown. While the officers were attempting
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1534 | November 20, 2019 Page 2 of 7
to subdue Daniels, Daniels bit Officer Brown on his left arm. The officers were
eventually able to secure Daniels and place him in a holding cell. As a result of
the altercation, Officer Brown’s shirt was bloodstained, and he was taken to the
hospital, where he received x-rays and a tetanus shot.
[4] Thereafter, on February 19, Henry County Jail Correctional Officer Amanda
Thackery and another officer responded to Daniels’ cell block after they were
informed that a blanket was covering one of the security cameras. When the
two officers arrived, Officer Thackery noticed “a mess of wires” on a table
inside the cell block. Id. at 102. Because Officer Thackery believed that the
wires were “some type of . . . tattooing device” that the inmates were not
allowed to possess, Officer Thackery entered the cell block and removed the
wires from the table. Id. At that point, Daniels grabbed the wires from Officer
Thackery’s hand and “wrapped” them around her wrists. Id. at 103. Officer
Thackery told Daniels to stop “multiple times,” but Daniels did not stop.
Instead, he “[t]ightened” the wires around Officer Thackery’s wrists and
“lift[ed]” her off the ground with the wires. Id. Daniels then started “physically
fighting” with Officer Thackery. Id. at 72. He “was pretty much tossing her
around, due to her small size.” Id. Ultimately, the other officer was able to pull
Daniels away from Officer Thackery. As a result of the altercation, Officer
Thackery sustained a cut on her finger and some redness on her wrists from the
wires.
[5] The State charged Daniels with two counts of battery against a public safety
official, as Level 6 felonies. At the conclusion of a jury trial on May 3, 2019,
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1534 | November 20, 2019 Page 3 of 7
the jury found Daniels guilty as charged. The court entered judgment of
conviction accordingly and sentenced Daniels to two years for each count. The
court then ordered those sentences to be served consecutively, for an aggregate
sentence of four years executed in the Department of Correction. This appeal
ensued.
Discussion and Decision
[6] Daniels contends that his sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature of the
offenses and his character. Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B) provides that “[t]he
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 and the character of the offender.” This court
has recently held that “[t]he advisory sentence is the starting point the
legislature has selected as an appropriate sentence for the crime committed.”
Sanders v. State, 71 N.E.3d 839, 844 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017). And the Indiana
Supreme Court has recently explained that:
The principal role of appellate review should be to attempt to
leaven the outliers . . . but not achieve a perceived “correct”
result in each case. Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219, 1225 (Ind.
2008). Defendant has the burden to persuade us that the
sentence imposed by the trial court is inappropriate. Anglemyer v.
State, 868 N.E.2d 482, 494 (Ind.), as amended (July 10, 2007),
decision clarified on reh’g, 875 N.E.2d 218 (Ind. 2007).
Shoun v. State, 67 N.E.3d 635, 642 (Ind. 2017) (omission in original).
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1534 | November 20, 2019 Page 4 of 7
[7] Indiana’s flexible sentencing scheme allows trial courts to tailor an appropriate
sentence to the circumstances presented, and the trial court’s judgment “should
receive considerable deference.” Cardwell, 895 N.E.2d at 1222. Whether we
regard a sentence as inappropriate 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 facts that come to light in a given case.” Id. at 1224.
The question is not whether another sentence is more appropriate, but rather
whether the sentence imposed is inappropriate. King v. State, 894 N.E.2d 265,
268 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008). Deference to the trial court “prevail[s] unless
overcome by compelling evidence portraying in a positive light the nature of the
offense (such as accompanied by restraint, regard, and lack of brutality) and the
defendant’s character (such as substantial virtuous traits or persistent examples
of good character).” Stephenson v. State, 29 N.E.3d 111, 122 (Ind. 2015).
[8] The sentencing range for a Level 6 felony is six months to two and one-half
years, with an advisory sentence of one year. See Ind. Code § 35-50-2-7 (2019).
Here, the trial court identified as an aggravating factor Daniels’ criminal
history. And the court did not identify any mitigators. Accordingly, the court
sentenced Daniels to two years executed in the Department of Correction on
each count and ordered the sentences to run consecutively, for an aggregate
sentence of four years.
[9] On appeal, Daniels asserts that his sentence is inappropriate in light of the
nature of the offenses because “there was nothing particularly remarkable about
either incident[.]” Appellant’s Br. at 7. And Daniels contends that his sentence
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1534 | November 20, 2019 Page 5 of 7
is inappropriate in light of his character because he “suffered a traumatic
childhood” and because he “had taken advantage of rehabilitation programs” in
the Department of Correction. Id. at 8.
[10] However, Daniels has not met his burden on appeal to demonstrate that his
sentence is inappropriate. With respect to the nature of the first offense,
Daniels threatened and repeatedly grabbed at Officer Brown. Then, when
Officer Brown attempted to get Daniels to return to his cell, Daniels struck
Officer Brown in the face. Daniels then starting “wrestling around” with
Officer Brown. Tr. Vol. II at 87. And Daniels bit Officer Brown on the arm
when officers attempted to subdue him. As a result of the altercation, Officer
Brown had to seek treatment at the hospital. And with respect to the nature of
the second offense, Daniels wrapped wires around Officer Thackery’s wrists
when she attempted to remove the contraband from the common area. When
Officer Thacker asked Daniels to stop, he instead tightened the wires around
her wrists, picked her up using the wires, and started “tossing her around.” Id.
at 72. In essence, Daniels twice battered jail officers who were attempting to
perform their duties. Accordingly, we cannot say that Daniels’ sentence is
inappropriate in light of the nature of the offenses.
[11] As to his character, Daniels has a lengthy criminal history that includes three
juvenile delinquency adjudications, five felony convictions, and two
misdemeanor convictions. Moreover, Daniels has been given numerous
opportunities to avoid incarceration in the past through alternative sentences,
but he continues to commit crimes. Further, Daniels was being held in jail for
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1534 | November 20, 2019 Page 6 of 7
other drug-related charges at the time he committed the instant offenses, which
reflects poorly on his character. We therefore cannot say that Daniels’ sentence
is inappropriate in light of his character. We affirm Daniels’ sentence.
[12] Affirmed.
Bailey, J., and May, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1534 | November 20, 2019 Page 7 of 7