Paul Trice v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) ( 2019 )

MEMORANDUM DECISION
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D),
this Memorandum Decision shall not be FILED
regarded as precedent or cited before any Aug 16 2019, 8:17 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
APPELLANT PRO SE ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Paul Trice Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
Bunker Hill, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana
Matthew B. Mackenzie
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Paul Trice, August 16, 2019
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
18A-CR-3014
v. Appeal from the Marion Superior
Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable Grant Hawkins,
Appellee-Plaintiff Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
49G05-9608-FA-120978
May, Judge.
[1] Paul Trice appeals the trial court’s denial of his petition for jail time credit.
Trice argues the trial court erred in not issuing a new Abstract of Judgment
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-3014 | August 16, 2019 Page 1 of 6
granting him 187 days of good time credit because his original sentencing order
indicated he was to receive credit for 187 days of pre-sentence time actually
served, but it did not indicate he also was to receive 187 days of good time
credit for serving those days. Trice cannot demonstrate the trial court erred in
denying his petition, however, because his petition indicated the Department of
Correction granted Trice his 187 days of good time credit. Accordingly, we
affirm the trial court’s denial of his petition.
Facts and Procedural History
[2] On March 11, 1997, Trice was convicted of Class B felony aggravated battery 1
and Class D felony criminal gang activity, 2 and was found to be a habitual
offender. 3 The court sentenced Trice to fifty years in prison and indicated Trice
was “given 187 days credit time.” (App. Vol. II at 9.) On appeal, we reversed
Trice’s conviction for criminal gang activity but affirmed his fifty-year sentence.
Trice v. State, 693 N.E.2d 649, 651 (Ind. Ct. App. 1998). The trial court entered
an amended abstract of judgment on April 24, 1998, to reflect the reversal of
Trice’s conviction for criminal gang activity. The amended abstract of
judgment again stated Trice was “given 187 days credit time.” (App. Vol. II at
9.)
1
Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1.5 (1991).
2
Ind. Code § 35-45-9-3 (1991).
3
Ind. Code § 35-50-2-8 (1995).
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-3014 | August 16, 2019 Page 2 of 6
[3] On October 6, 1999, Trice filed a petition for post-conviction relief. In June
2002, Trice moved to amend his petition for post-conviction relief. On
September 18, 2002, the court heard evidence on Trice’s petition and took the
issue under advisement. Trice argued he had received ineffective assistance of
counsel. (App. Vol. II at 64.) The post-conviction court agreed that Trice had
received ineffective assistance during his trial and appeal, and it vacated Trice’s
conviction of aggravated battery. (Id. at 67.) On August 30, 2006, the Court of
Appeals reinstated Trice’s conviction of aggravated battery and ordered Trice to
serve his fifty-year sentence in this cause number concurrent with his sentence
in “Cause No. 96008575.” (Id. at 13.)
[4] On February 20, 2018, Trice filed a motion to modify his sentence, which the
trial court denied. On April 5, 2018, Trice requested permission to file a
successive petition for post-conviction relief, which we authorized on June 18,
2018. The trial court forwarded Trice’s petition to the public defender’s office.
On August 14, 2018, the public defender’s office filed a notice of non-
representation. On October 22, 2018, Trice filed a pro se motion to withdraw
his petition for post-conviction relief without prejudice.
[5] On November 13, 2018, Trice filed a pro se petition for jail time credit, arguing
the trial court, by statute, was required to indicate on Trice’s sentencing order
that Trice was entitled to 187 days of good time credit in addition to the 187
days of jail credit. In his memorandum of support, Trice explained:
On August 9, 2018 Chief Deputy Defender James T. Acklin filed
his Notice of Non-Representation indicating that he contacted a
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-3014 | August 16, 2019 Page 3 of 6
DOC sentence computation analyst and confirmed Trice was
given good time credit for 187 days, and an additional 187 days
jail time credit, Chief Deputy, Public Defender James T. Acklin
determined that Defendant Trice did receive the proper amount
of credit[.]
(Id. at 21.) On November 26, 2018, the trial court denied Trice’s petition.
Discussion and Decision
[6] Trice argues the trial court erred when it denied his petition for jail time credit.
Trice believes the court erred in failing to grant him 187 days of good-time
credit.
When an error related to sentencing occurs, it is in the best
interests of all concerned that it be immediately discovered and
corrected. Other than an immediate motion to correct sentence,
such errors are best presented to the trial court by the optional
motion to correct error under Indiana Trial Rule 59, or upon a
direct appeal from the final judgment of the trial court pursuant
to Indiana Appellate Rule 9(A).
Robinson v. State, 805 N.E.2d 783, 786 (Ind. 2004). “When claims of sentencing
errors require consideration of matters outside the face of the sentencing
judgment, they are best addressed promptly on direct appeal and thereafter via
post-conviction relief proceedings where applicable.” Id. at 787.
[7] As Trice correctly notes, pursuant to an Indiana statute, the trial court’s
judgment must include “the amount of credit time earned for the time spent in
confinement.” Ind. Code § 35-38-3-2(4). In Crow v. State, 805 N.E.2d 780 (Ind.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-3014 | August 16, 2019 Page 4 of 6
2004), the Indiana Supreme Court held “credit time earned” under Title 35
included good time credit, id. at 782, such that the trial court’s judgment should
indicate both credit earned for actual days served and good time credit earned.
Id. However, in Robinson, which was decided the same day as Crow, our
Indiana Supreme Court explained:
Sentencing judgments that report only days spent in pre-sentence
confinement and fail to expressly designate credit time earned
shall be understood by courts and by the Department of
Correction automatically to award the number of credit time
days equal to the number of pre-sentence confinement days.
Robinson, 805 N.E.2d at 792.
[8] With his petition for jail time credit, Trice filed a Memorandum in Support. In
that memorandum, Trice explained he was notified by the Public Defender’s
Office on August 9, 2018, that the Department of Correction had credited him
the 187 days of good time credit on top of his 187 days of credit for actual time
served. Because Trice’s request for relief demonstrated he had already received
the good credit time he purports to be seeking, we cannot say the trial court
erred when it denied his petition. See, e.g., id. at 795 (holding no abuse of
discretion in denial of motion to correct sentence).
Conclusion
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-3014 | August 16, 2019 Page 5 of 6
[9] Because Trice provided information to the trial court showing he had received
the good time credit he was seeking, the trial court properly denied his petition.
Accordingly, we affirm.
[10] Affirmed.
Mathias, J., and Brown, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-3014 | August 16, 2019 Page 6 of 6