DocketNumber： 71S03-1306-CR-455
Judges： Dickson, Rucker, David, Massa, Rush
Filed Date： 6/28/2013
Status： Precedential
Modified Date： 11/11/2024
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Jeffrey L. Sanford Gregory F. Zoeller South Bend, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana Angela N. Sanchez Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana ______________________________________________________________________________ In the Indiana Supreme Court Jun 28 2013, 11:36 am _________________________________ No. 71S03-1306-CR-455 VALENTIN ESCOBEDO, Appellant (Defendant), v. STATE OF INDIANA, Appellee (Plaintiff). _________________________________ Appeal from the St. Joseph Superior Court, No. 71D01-0812-FA-49 The Honorable Jane Woodward Miller, Judge _________________________________ On Transfer from the Indiana Court of Appeals, No. 71A03-1202-CR-60 _________________________________ June 28, 2013 Dickson, Chief Justice. Sentenced to an aggregate term of fifty-three years upon convictions for Battery, a class A felony, and Neglect of a Dependent as a class D felony, the defendant appealed asserting claims of error in the trial court's evidentiary rulings and seeking appellate sentence review and revision under Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B). The Court of Appeals affirmed. Escobedo v. State,987 N.E.2d 103
(Ind. Ct. App. 2013). We now grant transfer to address a single point. In rejecting the defendant's request for appellate sentence revision, the Court of Appeals summarized its analysis as follows: "In other words, the maximum sentence here can be justified as a deontological response giving voice to a community's outrage, based on the facts and cir- cumstances of the crime."Id. at 120
. We disagree and disapprove of consideration of a commu- nity's outrage in the determination or review of a criminal sentence. Notwithstanding this refer- ence, however, we agree with the ultimate conclusion of the Court of Appeals that the sentence imposed by the trial court is appropriate and should be affirmed. In all other respects we summarily affirm the opinion of the Court of Appeals. Indiana Appellate Rule 58(A)(2). Rucker, David, Massa, and Rush, JJ., concur. 2