Anthony Dwayne Jones v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) ( 2019 )

MEMORANDUM DECISION
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 ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Lisa M. Johnson Curtis T. Hill, Jr. FILED
Brownsburg, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana Apr 25 2019, 9:36 am
J.T. Whitehead CLERK
Indiana Supreme Court
Deputy Attorney General Court of Appeals
and Tax Court
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Anthony Dwayne Jones, April 25, 2019
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
18A-CR-2609
v. Appeal from the Marion Superior
Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable Kurt Eisgruber,
Appellee-Plaintiff Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
49G01-1706-F1-23527
Baker, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2609 | April 25, 2019 Page 1 of 4
[1] Anthony Jones appeals following his convictions for Level 1 felony rape, Level
3 felony robbery resulting in serious bodily injury, Level 4 felony sexual battery,
Level 5 felony kidnapping, Level 5 felony criminal confinement, and Level 6
felony intimidation. The trial court also found Jones to be an habitual offender.
Jones argues that the habitual offender charging information is insufficient as a
matter of law and that the adjudication should be reversed. Finding no error,
we affirm.
[2] The State charged Jones with nine counts on June 26, 2017. On April 18, 2018,
the State filed an amended information adding the habitual offender allegation.
The information includes the following details about three prior felony
convictions:
On or about 3/8/10, in Marion County Superior Court, Criminal
Division, Room F09, State of Indiana, Anthony Dwayne Jones
was convicted of Intimidation, a Class D Felony under Cause
Number 49F09-1002-FD-008534.
And;
On or about 12/12/14, in Marion County Superior Court,
Criminal Division, Room G02, State of Indiana, Anthony
Dwayne Jones was convicted of Robbery, a Class B felony and
Handgun[,] Carrying without a Lic[ense], a Class C Felony,
under Cause Number 49G02-1009-FB-073340.
And;
On or about 12/11/14, in Marion County Superior Court,
Criminal Division, Room G24, State of Indiana, Anthony
Dwayne Jones was convicted of Failure to Return to Lawful
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2609 | April 25, 2019 Page 2 of 4
Detention, a Class [sic] 6 Felony under Cause Number 49G24-
1411-F6-052690.
Appellant’s App. Vol. II p. 68 (original emphases omitted). On August 28,
2018, the jury convicted Jones of the above-listed charges. On September 28,
2018, the trial court found him to be an habitual offender and sentenced him to
an aggregate term of sixty-five years imprisonment.
[3] Jones’s sole argument on appeal is that the habitual offender allegation does not
include sufficient information to put him on notice of the charged offense. See,
e.g., Thompson v. State, 761 N.E.2d 467, 470 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002) (holding that
absent sufficient notice that a particular offense is charged, a defendant cannot
be convicted or sentenced for that offense).
[4] To support an habitual offender allegation with respect to a person convicted of
a Level 1 through Level 4 felony, the State must prove beyond a reasonable
doubt that the defendant has been convicted of two prior, unrelated felonies and
that at least one of those prior felonies is not a Level 6 or a Class D felony. Ind.
Code § 35-50-2-8(b). Additionally, the State must show that “the commission
of the second [offense] was subsequent to his having been sentenced upon the
first, and that the commission of the principal offense upon which the enhanced
punishment is being sought was subsequent to his having been sentenced upon
the second conviction.” Webster v. State, 628 N.E.2d 1212, 1215 (Ind. 1994),
abrogated in part on other grounds by Richardson v. State, 717 N.E.2d 32 (Ind.
1999). Jones maintains that because the charging information does not provide
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2609 | April 25, 2019 Page 3 of 4
the commission or sentencing dates for the prior offenses, it does not include all
essential elements for the charge and the adjudication cannot stand.
[5] We disagree. Our Supreme Court has refused to find an habitual offender
charge defective for lack of specificity unless the phraseology in the information
misleads the defendant or fails to give him notice of the charges against him.
Logston v. State, 535 N.E.2d 525, 528 (Ind. 1989) (finding an habitual offender
charge sufficiently specific where it failed to expressly charge that the prior
criminal offenses were felonies).
[6] Here, the charging information describes four prior felonies and includes one
felony that is neither a Class D nor a Level 6 felony. For each conviction, it
lists the date of the conviction, the court in which the conviction occurred, the
type of conviction, and the cause number. We find that these details include
enough information to have given Jones sufficient certainty to prepare and
present his defense. Therefore, we find no error.
[7] The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Najam, J., and Robb, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2609 | April 25, 2019 Page 4 of 4