William M. Hardin v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) ( 2019 )


Menu:
  • MEMORANDUM DECISION
    Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D),
    this Memorandum Decision shall not be                                      FILED
    regarded as precedent or cited before any                             Nov 12 2019, 9:17 am
    court except for the purpose of establishing                               CLERK
    Indiana Supreme Court
    the defense of res judicata, collateral                                   Court of Appeals
    and Tax Court
    estoppel, or the law of the case.
    ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT                                  ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
    Devon M. Sharpe                                         Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
    Jenner & Pattison                                       Attorney General of Indiana
    Madison, Indiana                                        Megan M. Smith
    Deputy Attorney General
    Indianapolis, Indiana
    IN THE
    COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
    William M. Hardin,                                      November 12, 2019
    Appellant-Defendant,                                    Court of Appeals Case No.
    19A-CR-1203
    v.                                              Appeal from the Jefferson Circuit
    Court
    State of Indiana,                                       The Honorable Steven M. Fleece,
    Appellee-Plaintiff.                                     Senior Judge
    Trial Court Cause No.
    39C01-1804-F4-370
    Brown, Judge.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1203 | November 12, 2019              Page 1 of 7
    [1]   William M. Hardin appeals his sentence for sexual misconduct with a minor as
    a level 5 felony. He raises one issue which is whether his sentence is
    inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and his character. We affirm.
    Facts and Procedural History
    [2]   On April 9, 2018, the State filed a probable cause affidavit in which Indiana
    State Police Officer Christopher Howell asserted that on December 9, 2017 he
    was advised of possible sexual misconduct with a minor; that A.D. was a
    fifteen-year-old girl who lived with her mother and stepfather, Hardin, who was
    born in 1974; and that he interviewed A.D. who told him that Hardin had been
    molesting her since August 2017. The affidavit alleged various sexual
    encounters almost daily from August through December 8, 2017, and included
    intercourse.
    [3]   On April 9, 2018, the State charged Hardin with Count I, sexual misconduct
    with a minor as a level 4 felony, and Count II, sexual misconduct with a minor
    as a level 5 felony. Count II alleged that on or about or between August 1,
    2017, and December 8, 2017, Hardin performed or submitted to sexual
    intercourse or other sexual conduct with A.D., who was at least fourteen years
    old but less than sixteen years old. On April 10, 2019, Hardin and the State
    filed a plea agreement in which he agreed to plead guilty to Count II and the
    State agreed to dismiss Count I and cause number 39C01-1902-F6-235 (“Cause
    No. 235”). That same day, the court held a hearing.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1203 | November 12, 2019   Page 2 of 7
    [4]   On April 16, 2018, the court entered an order releasing Hardin on his own
    recognizance due to serious health problems. In March 2019, the State filed a
    motion to revoke pretrial release, and the court granted the motion. 1
    [5]   On April 30, 2019, the court held a sentencing hearing. Hardin gave the
    following statement:
    Uh – I know I’ve been a bad person who has went down the
    wrong road in life, and I’ve turned my life over to Jesus, and I
    plan to follow his – his roadway, God’s law – because I don’t see
    how you can go wrong with God’s law because my parents
    disgust me. I don’t want to go back down that route again, and if
    you could see fit to turn me loose I can almost guarantee you I
    wouldn’t – you’d never see me in here again. I just want to be
    out here following Jesus, be with my wife, take care of my kids
    and work, and I – I’m hoping everybody can forgive me for
    everything I’ve done. It caused pain and anguish and – and I’m
    sorry. I’m sorry for everything, but God’s with me now so I
    know I’m going down the right path, and I plan on staying there,
    and thank you.
    Transcript Volume II at 5. Upon questioning by the court, he indicated that his
    wife is A.D.’s mother and A.D. lived with her. The court stated that the
    presentence investigation report (“PSI”) indicated that it would be undesirable
    for him to reside in the same place with A.D. He replied:
    1
    The record does not contain a copy of the motion to revoke pretrial release. At the sentencing hearing, the
    prosecutor stated: “[I]n regard to the violation of pretrial release, that was a continuing offense unless Mr.
    Hardin has received a divorce from one of his two wives. At this point it’s still a continuing offense. He was
    out for an extended period of time, could have taken care of that in one way or another, did not. That’s why
    the motion to revoke his pretrial release was filed.” Transcript Volume II at 12.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1203 | November 12, 2019                  Page 3 of 7
    Right. I didn’t plan on that. I mean I could stay at my parents’
    house. They still see (inaudible) until A.D. decides that she’s
    going to go out on her own or whatever. I wouldn’t go anywhere
    near her, and I haven’t. But I – I can reside at my parents and
    still spend with [sic] my wife and my girls and take care of them
    at the same time like I have in the past.
    
    Id. at 6.
    [6]   The prosecutor argued that Hardin should receive a sentence of five years in the
    Department of Correction (“DOC”) with no time suspended. The probation
    officer who prepared the PSI recommended that he be ordered to serve his
    entire sentence at the DOC. Defense counsel requested the advisory sentence
    of three years and “if there is to be a short term of imprisonment that the
    balance be on terms and conditions of probation.” 
    Id. at 11.
    [7]   The court found Hardin’s guilty plea as a mitigator but observed that he
    received the dismissal of the remaining count as well as “the other case alleging
    bigamy.” 
    Id. at 14.
    In its order, the court also found the following mitigator:
    “The Defendant expressed remorse for his offense and professed his recent
    religious conversion would deter future misconduct.” Appellant’s Appendix
    Volume II at 42. During the sentencing hearing, the court stated: “With regard
    to the offense being unlikely to recur with regard to this particular victim A.D.,
    who I think is here with us today, I would certainly hope and expect that it
    would not recur there, but the attitude towards A.D. and the failure to
    understand the gross criminality and gross immorality of what you did to A.D.
    is something which is very troubling.” Transcript Volume II at 14. The court
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1203 | November 12, 2019   Page 4 of 7
    also stated: “It shouldn’t take a theologian or a degree in divinity to understand
    that [sexually molesting a child] is anathema, that that is forbidden not only by
    the law of the State of Indiana but by the moral law and the natural law, and
    you violated it, and you know what to say now, but I am not convinced that
    you wouldn’t be a danger to other children in the future.” 
    Id. at 14-15.
    The
    court found the following aggravators: his criminal record; his position of care,
    custody, or control of A.D.; the offense was premeditated and consisted of a
    series of incidents; he recently violated a condition of pretrial release; and
    A.D.’s trauma. The court found that the aggravating circumstances
    outweighed the mitigating circumstances and sentenced him to four years
    executed at the DOC and one year as a direct placement to community
    corrections.
    Discussion
    [8]   The issue is whether Hardin’s sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature of
    the offense and his character. Hardin acknowledges that “[i]t is incontrovertible
    that the crime of sexual misconduct on a minor is a serious one, with
    sometimes lasting consequences on victims.” Appellant’s Brief at 9. He argues
    that a defendant’s health is a relevant fact in considering the character of the
    offender and asserts that he suffers from an impaired aorta valve. He points out
    that the PSI indicates that the Indiana Risk Assessment Tool places him in the
    low category to reoffend. He also asserts that he pled guilty, accepted
    responsibility, and expressed sincere remorse. The State argues that Hardin’s
    sexual abuse of A.D. was premeditated, horrific, and repeated, that he exploited
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1203 | November 12, 2019   Page 5 of 7
    a position of care, control, and authority over A.D., and that his decision to
    plead guilty was, at least partially, self-serving.
    [9]    Ind. 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 offense and the character
    of the offender.” Under this rule, the burden is on the defendant to persuade
    the appellate court that his or her sentence is inappropriate. Childress v. State,
    
    848 N.E.2d 1073
    , 1080 (Ind. 2006).
    [10]   Ind. Code § 35-50-2-6 provides that a person who commits a level 5 felony shall
    be imprisoned for a fixed term of between one and six years with the advisory
    sentence being three years.
    [11]   Our review of the nature of the offense reveals that Hardin committed sexual
    misconduct with his fifteen-year-old stepdaughter over a period of months. Our
    review of the character of the offender reveals that Hardin pled guilty to sexual
    misconduct with a minor as a level 5 felony and the State agreed to dismiss the
    charge of sexual misconduct with a minor as a level 4 felony as well as Cause
    No. 235 related to a bigamy charge. As an adult, Hardin pled guilty to driving
    while suspended as a class A misdemeanor in 1996; battery as a class A
    misdemeanor in 1998; operating a vehicle while intoxicated endangering a
    person and resisting law enforcement as class A misdemeanors in 2006, and
    operating while intoxicated as a class D felony in 2007. He was also convicted
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1203 | November 12, 2019   Page 6 of 7
    of operating a vehicle with a BAC of .08 or more but less than .15 as a class C
    misdemeanor in 2017.
    [12]   After due consideration, we conclude that Hardin has not sustained his burden
    of establishing that his sentence of four years executed at the DOC and one year
    as a direct placement in community corrections is inappropriate.
    [13]   For the foregoing reasons, we affirm Hardin’s sentence.
    [14]   Affirmed.
    Altice, J., and Tavitas, J., concur.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1203 | November 12, 2019   Page 7 of 7
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 19A-CR-1203

Filed Date: 11/12/2019

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021