Sammie L. Binion v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

MEMORANDUM DECISION
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D),
FILED
this Memorandum Decision shall not be Nov 30 2016, 8:22 am
regarded as precedent or cited before any CLERK
Indiana Supreme Court
court except for the purpose of establishing Court of Appeals
and Tax Court
the defense of res judicata, collateral
estoppel, or the law of the case.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Peter D. Todd Gregory F. Zoeller
Elkhart, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana
Matthew B. Mackenzie
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Sammie L. Binion, November 30, 2016
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
20A04-1604-CR-918
v. Appeal from the Elkhart Superior
Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable Gretchen S. Lund,
Appellee-Plaintiff. Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
20D04-1406-FD-682
Najam, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A04-1604-CR-918 | November 30, 2016 Page 1 of 3
Statement of the Case
[1] Sammie Binion appeals his sentence following his conviction for theft, as a
Class D felony. Binion presents a single issue for our review, namely, whether
the trial court erred when it imposed a fee for collecting a DNA sample from
him. We affirm.
Facts and Procedural History
[2] On March 2, 2016, Binion pleaded guilty to theft, as a Class D felony. On
March 30, the trial court sentenced Binion to 545 days executed in the Indiana
Department of Correction. In its sentencing statement, the trial court ordered
Binion “to submit to a DNA sample at his own expense.” Tr. at 23. This
appeal ensued.
Discussion and Decision
[3] Binion acknowledges that, under Indiana Code Section 10-13-6-10 (2016), he is
required to provide a DNA sample. Binion also acknowledges that, under
Indiana Code Section 33-37-5-26.2, he was required to pay a $2 fee for the
collection of that DNA sample. But Binion contends that the trial court
imposed an additional fee for the collection of the DNA sample for “an
indeterminate amount of money[.]” Appellant’s Br. at 5. And Binion
maintains that “[n]othing in the code authorizes the court to impose” that
alleged additional fee. Id.
[4] Binion does not direct us to anything in the record showing that he was
required to pay more than $2 for the DNA sample collection. The only
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A04-1604-CR-918 | November 30, 2016 Page 2 of 3
reference to a DNA collection fee in the record is the trial court’s statement at
sentencing that Binion was “to submit to a DNA sample at his own expense.”
Tr. at 23. As the State points out, there is no evidence to suggest that, with that
statement, the trial court meant anything other than the statutory $2 collection
fee. Accordingly, Binion has not shown any error.
[5] Affirmed.
Bailey, J, and May, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A04-1604-CR-918 | November 30, 2016 Page 3 of 3