Jennifer L. Buchanan v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) ( 2015 )

MEMORANDUM DECISION
Apr 28 2015, 9:16 am
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this
Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as
precedent or cited before any court except for the
purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata,
collateral estoppel, or the law of the case.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE
Chris Palmer Frazier Gregory F. Zoeller
Indianapolis, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana
Jesse R. Drum
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Jennifer L. Buchanan, April 28, 2015
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
70A04-1501-CR-25
v. Appeal from the Rush Circuit Court
The Honorable Brian D. Hill, Judge
Cause No. 70D01-1404-FA-148
State of Indiana,
Appellee-Plaintiff
Bailey, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 70A04-1501-CR-25 | April 28, 2015 Page 1 of 6
Case Summary
[1] Jennifer Buchanan (“Buchanan”) pled guilty to Possession of a Controlled
Substance, as a Class C felony,1 and was sentenced to eight years
imprisonment, with six years executed in the Department of Correction and
two years to be served on home detention. She now appeals, and raises for our
review only the issue of whether her sentence was inappropriate under
Appellate Rule 7(B).
[2] We affirm.
Facts and Procedural History
[3] Within the course of several controlled purchases of narcotics, police learned
that on November 6, 2013, Buchanan had in her possession hydrocodone pills
for which she lacked a valid prescription. At the time, Buchanan was within
1000 feet of a family housing complex.
[4] On April 1, 2014, Buchanan was charged with two counts of Dealing in
Methamphetamine, as Class A felonies;2 two counts of Possession of
Methamphetamine, as Class B felonies;3 Dealing in a Controlled Substance, as
1
Ind. Code § 35-48-4-7(a)(2) (West 2013). Buchanan’s offenses were committed before the July 1, 2014,
effective date of substantial revisions to Indiana’s criminal code. We refer throughout to the substantive
provisions of the statutes in effect at the time of her offenses.
2
I.C. §§ 35-48-4-1.1(a)(1)(C) & (b)(3)(B).
3
I.C. § 35-48-4-6.1(a)(2)(B).
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 70A04-1501-CR-25 | April 28, 2015 Page 2 of 6
a Class A felony;4 and Possession of a Controlled Substance. A warrant for
Buchanan’s arrest was issued on April 2, 2014, subsequent to which Buchanan
was taken into custody.
[5] On December 8, 2014, Buchanan and the State entered into a plea agreement.
Under the terms of the agreement, Buchanan agreed to enter a guilty plea to a
single charge of Possession of a Controlled Substance, as a Class C felony. The
State agreed that all sentencing matters would be left to the trial court’s
discretion. The State further agreed to dismiss all the other charges in the case.
[6] On December 22, 2014, a change of plea hearing was conducted, at which time
the trial court accepted the plea agreement and entered judgment of conviction.
A presentencing investigation report had already been completed, and after
argument of counsel the trial court sentenced Buchanan to eight years
imprisonment, with six years executed in the Department of Correction and
two years to be served on home detention.
[7] This appeal ensued.
Discussion and Decision
[8] On appeal, Buchanan contends that the sentence imposed by the trial court was
inappropriate under Appellate Rule 7(B).
4
I.C. § 35-48-4-2(b)(2).
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 70A04-1501-CR-25 | April 28, 2015 Page 3 of 6
[9] The authority granted to this Court by Article 7, § 6 of the Indiana Constitution
permitting appellate review and revision of criminal sentences is implemented
through 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 and the character of the offender.” Under this rule, and as
interpreted by case law, appellate courts may revise sentences after due
consideration of the trial court’s decision, if the sentence is found to be
inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and the character of the
offender. Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219, 1222-25 (Ind. 2008); Serino v. State,
798 N.E.2d 852, 856-57 (Ind. 2003). The principal role of such review is to
attempt to leaven the outliers. Cardwell, 895 N.E.2d at 1225.
[10] Here, Buchanan was convicted of Possession of a Controlled Substance, as a
Class C felony. She faced a sentencing range running from two to eight years
imprisonment, with an advisory term of four years. I.C. § 35-50-2-6(a). The
trial court sentenced her to the maximum term of eight years, with six years to
be served in the Department of Correction and two years to be served on home
detention with Rush County Community Corrections.
[11] Turning first to the nature of Buchanan’s offense, police obtained hydrocodone
pills that had been in Buchanan’s possession through a confidential informant’s
purchase of the pills in a controlled buy. This was one of three such
transactions in which Buchanan was reported to have been involved; some of
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 70A04-1501-CR-25 | April 28, 2015 Page 4 of 6
these transactions appear to have occurred at Buchanan’s home, the residence
of her minor children.
[12] With respect to Buchanan’s character, we note that she entered a guilty plea.
However, Buchanan also received a very substantial benefit from her plea: the
dismissal of five charges in this case, each of which carried longer potential
terms of imprisonment from the single charge to which she pleaded guilty.
[13] Further, our review of the record reveals that Buchanan has a long history of
substance abuse and other criminal behavior. Buchanan has been convicted on
two separate occasions of Operating a Vehicle While Intoxicated; one of these
resulted in serious bodily injury, and was a felony-level offense. Buchanan has
also been convicted of Battery, Domestic Battery, and Resisting Law
Enforcement, as Class A misdemeanors, and Public Intoxication endangering a
person’s life, as a Class B misdemeanor. Buchanan was serving a portion of her
sentence for her most recent conviction for Operating While Intoxicated when
she committed the offense at issue in this case, and as a result violated the terms
of her home detention program.
[14] After her arrest, Buchanan sought substance abuse treatment within two
months of her guilty plea and sentencing hearing—several months after her
arrest in the instant case. However, Buchanan suffers from mental health issues
which, by her own choice, have gone untreated. After attempting suicide in
December 2014, she declined further counseling. Though Buchanan
acknowledged at sentencing the need for treatment, she took no action to seek
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 70A04-1501-CR-25 | April 28, 2015 Page 5 of 6
such treatment before that point. In sum, then, Buchanan has committed
numerous prior offenses and has had numerous prior substance abuse issues,
but has not availed herself of rehabilitation opportunities when they were
previously offered.
[15] Finally, Buchanan is a parent of three children, two of whom were in her care
at the time of her offense. Buchanan argues that the long duration of her
sentence will preclude her from parenting these children. We observe,
however, that these children were taken into foster care as a result of the instant
offense.
[16] In light of the nature of Buchanan’s offense, her character, and the substantial
benefit she received as a result of her guilty plea, we cannot conclude that
Buchanan’s sentence of eight years imprisonment, with six years executed in
the Department of Correction and two years to be served on home detention, is
inappropriate.
[17] Affirmed.
Riley, J., and Barnes, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 70A04-1501-CR-25 | April 28, 2015 Page 6 of 6