Matthew Q. Baker v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) ( 2019 )

MEMORANDUM DECISION
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this
Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as
FILED
precedent or cited before any court except for the Apr 22 2019, 8:02 am
purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, CLERK
collateral estoppel, or the law of the case. Indiana Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
and Tax Court
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Michael P. DeArmitt Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
Columbus, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana
Matthew B. MacKenzie
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Matthew Q. Baker, April 22, 2019
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
18A-CR-2720
v. Appeal from the Bartholomew
Superior Court
State of Indiana, The Hon. James D. Worton,
Appellee-Plaintiff. Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
03D01-1806-F5-3242
Bradford, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2720 | Apirl 22, 2019 Page 1 of 5
Case Summary
[1] In June of 2018, Matthew Baker confined his ex-girlfriend Candie Conrad in
her home against her will, later pled guilty to Level 6 felony criminal
confinement, and was sentenced to two and one-half years of incarceration.
Baker contends that his sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature of his
offense and his character. Because we disagree, we affirm.
Facts and Procedural History
[2] On June 10, 2018, Baker forced his way into Conrad’s home and physically
confined her against her will, also grabbing, pushing, slapping, and punching
her. At one point, Baker held a knife to Conrad’s throat and threatened her life
and the lives of her daughter and her cats. Conrad suffered bruising as a result
of Baker’s abuse during her confinement. On June 12, 2018, the State charged
Baker with Level 5 felony intimidation with a deadly weapon, Level 6 felony
criminal confinement, and Class A misdemeanor domestic battery. On
September 10, 2018, Baker pled guilty to criminal confinement in exchange for
the other counts being dismissed and agreed that sentencing would be left to the
trial court’s discretion. On October 16, 2018, the trial court sentenced Baker to
two and one-half years of incarceration. The trial court noted Baker’s extensive
criminal history, his history of violating the terms of probation, that past
treatment opportunities had been unsuccessful, and his history of battery and
domestic-violence offenses.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2720 | Apirl 22, 2019 Page 2 of 5
Discussion and Decision
[3] Baker contends that his two-and-one-half year sentence, which is the maximum
sentence for a Level 6 felony, is inappropriately harsh. See Ind. Code § 35-50-2-
7(b). We may revise a sentence 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.” Ind. Appellate Rule 7(B). The
“nature of the offense” refers to the defendant’s acts in comparison with the
elements of his offense, Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219, 1224 (Ind. 2008),
while “character of the offender” refers to general sentencing considerations
and the relevant aggravating and mitigating circumstances. Knapp v. State, 9
N.E.3d 1274, 1292 (Ind. 2014). Baker has the burden to show that his sentence
is inappropriate in light of both the nature of the offense and his character. Gil
v. State, 988 N.E.2d 1231, 1237 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013). This can only be done
with “compelling evidence portraying in a positive light the nature of the
offense […] and the defendant’s character[.]” Stephenson v. State, 29 N.E.3d
111, 122 (Ind. 2015).
[4] The nature of Baker’s offense is significantly worse than a typical Level 6 felony
criminal confinement. While Baker’s conviction was supported by his
admission that he “knowingly or intentionally confine[d Conrad] without [her]
consent[,]” Ind. Code § 35-42-3-3(a), the record indicates that his actions went
far beyond that. According to the probable cause affidavit, Baker’s confinement
of Conrad began when he forced his way into her house and grabbed, pushed
and slapped her. Baker held a butcher’s knife to Conrad’s throat and threatened
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2720 | Apirl 22, 2019 Page 3 of 5
her life and the lives of her daughter and her cats. When Conrad attempted to
leave the house to contact police who happened to be nearby, Baker grabbed
her, threw her onto a couch, and punched her legs with his fist. A police officer
later observed swelling to Conrad’s cheeks and bruising on her legs, back, and
chest. These facts could have supported charges far more serious than Level 6
felony criminal confinement, including, but not limited to, Level 5 felony
criminal confinement causing bodily injury, Ind. Code § 35-42-3-3(b)(1)(C), or
Level 3 felony criminal confinement while using a deadly weapon. Ind. Code §
35-42-3-3(b)(2)(A). In comparison to the elements of Level 6 felony criminal
confinement, the far more serious nature of Baker’s offense justifies his
sentence.
[5] Baker’s character, which is revealed by his lengthy criminal history, also
justifies his sentence. Over the course of almost thirty years, the forty-eight-
year-old Baker has accumulated adult convictions for Class C felony burglary,
Class D felony residential entry, two counts of Class A misdemeanor resisting
law enforcement, two counts of Class A misdemeanor battery, Class A
misdemeanor domestic battery, Class A misdemeanor operating while
intoxicated, Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana, Class B
misdemeanor mischief, four counts of Class C misdemeanor illegal
consumption, and Class C misdemeanor driving while suspended. Baker’s
record also shows that less-restrictive measures have failed. Baker has had his
probation revoked six times, resulting in the imposition of over eight years of
executed time that had previously been suspended. Despite Baker’s lengthy
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2720 | Apirl 22, 2019 Page 4 of 5
history of criminal convictions and many chances to reform himself, he has not
chosen to do so. Baker has failed to convince us that his two-and-one-half-year
sentence for Level 6 felony criminal confinement is inappropriate.
[6] The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Crone, J., and Tavitas, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2720 | Apirl 22, 2019 Page 5 of 5