Raphael Miles v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

MEMORANDUM DECISION
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), Nov 04 2015, 9:41 am
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.
APPELLANT PRO SE ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Raphael Miles Gregory F. Zoeller
Greencastle, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana
Christina D. Pace
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Raphael Miles, November 4, 2015
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
82A01-1505-CR-494
v. Appeal from the Vanderburgh
Circuit Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable David D. Kiely,
Appellee-Plaintiff. Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
82C01-0004-CF-472
Bradford, Judge.
Case Summary
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 82A01-1505-CR-494 | November 4, 2015 Page 1 of 4
[1] In June of 2001, Appellant-Defendant Raphael Miles was convicted of two
counts of Class B felony dealing in cocaine and one count of Class A
misdemeanor dealing in marijuana. Miles was also determined to be a habitual
offender. On June 27, 2001, the trial court sentenced Miles to an aggregate term
of thirty-five years. The trial court awarded Miles credit for 261 days actual
time served in confinement while awaiting sentencing as well as 261 days good
time credit.
[2] On April 16, 2015, Miles filed a petition for jail time credit, alleging that the
trial court failed to award him the 261 days good time credit to which he was
entitled. The trial court denied Miles’s motion. Because the record indicates
that Miles was awarded all of the requested credit time, we conclude that the
trial court acted within its discretion in denying Miles’s motion.
Facts and Procedural History
[3] In July of 1999, Appellee-Plaintiff the State of Indiana (the “State”) charged
Miles with two counts of Class B felony dealing in cocaine and one count of
Class A misdemeanor dealing in marijuana. In February of 2001, the State
filed an allegation that Miles was a habitual offender. Following a jury trial,
Miles was found guilty of all three dealing charges. Miles subsequently
admitted to being a habitual offender.
[4] On June 27, 2001, the trial court sentenced Miles to an aggregate term of thirty-
five years. The trial court awarded Miles credit for 261 days actual time served
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 82A01-1505-CR-494 | November 4, 2015 Page 2 of 4
in confinement while awaiting sentencing. The trial court also awarded Miles
credit for an additional 261 days of good time credit.
[5] On April 16, 2015, Miles filed a petition for jail time credit, alleging that the
trial court had failed to award him the 261 days good time credit to which he
was entitled. The trial court subsequently denied Miles’s motion. This appeal
follows.
Discussion and Decision
[6] On appeal, Miles contends that the trial court abused its discretion in denying
his petition for an addition 261 days of jail credit time. We review the denial of
Miles petition to correct an allegedly erroneous sentence for an abuse of
discretion. Felder v. State, 870 N.E.2d 554, 560 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007). “An abuse
of discretion will be found only when the trial court’s decision is against the
logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before it.” Id.
[7] In raising the contention that the trial court abused its discretion in denying his
petition for jail time credit, Miles argues that the trial court’s abstract of
judgment does not clearly reflect whether he was awarded 261 days of good
time credit to which he was entitled. Review of the entire record, however,
clearly demonstrates that the trial court awarded Miles the full amount of credit
that Miles sought in his petition for jail time credit. The record reflects that the
trial court awarded Miles credit for both the 261 days actual time served in
confinement prior to sentencing plus 261 days good time credit. Thus, because
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 82A01-1505-CR-494 | November 4, 2015 Page 3 of 4
Miles had already received the full amount of credit time sought in his petition
for jail time credit, we cannot say that the trial court abused its discretion in
denying Miles’s petition.1
[8] The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
May, J., and Crone, J., concur.
1
Because we have elected to decide Miles’s appeal on the merits, we deny the State’s motion
to dismiss in an order handed down simultaneously with this memorandum decision.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 82A01-1505-CR-494 | November 4, 2015 Page 4 of 4