Adam Morris v. State of Indiana
2013 Ind. App. LEXIS 165
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Morris was convicted of Class A misdemeanor OWI following an ATV crash that killed Celeste; BAC at incident was .158.
- Plea agreement on July 9, 2012 provided sentencing discretion to the court and did not mention restitution.
- Sept. 28, 2012, the court imposed a one-year fully executed sentence plus $14,972.45 restitution to Celeste’s family for funeral expenses.
- The plea agreement dismissed the C felony charge and referenced probation terms but did not expressly state Morris would receive probation.
- Morris challenges the sentence on direct appeal, including waiver, appropriateness, and restitution issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the guilty plea waive direct-appeal challenges to sentence? | Morris argues the boilerplate waiver covered appellate review of any sentence. | State contends waiver exists for challenging sentence within plea terms. | Waiver ambiguity exists; we address appropriateness and not barred by plea. |
| Is Morris's one-year sentence inappropriate under Rule 7(B)? | Morris contends the sentence is inappropriate given offenses and circumstances. | State contends sentence is appropriate given offense severity and lack of prior record. | Sentence not inappropriate under Rule 7(B); proper consideration of offense and character. |
| Whether the restitution order of $14,972.45 was improper or beyond the plea agreement | Morris argues the restitution award is unsupported and bartered by plea terms. | State contends restitution follows from underlying incident facts and plea terms. | Restitution reversed; plea silent on restitution, exceeding scope of agreement. |
Key Cases Cited
- Creech v. State, 887 N.E.2d 73 (Ind. 2008) (waiver of appellate review within plea agreements must be knowingly and voluntarily made)
- Davis v. State, 937 N.E.2d 8 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (distinguishes erroneous from inappropriate sentence for Rule 7(B) purposes)
- Farmer v. State, 772 N.E.2d 1025 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002) (broad rule on considering dismissed charges in aggravation; later limited by Bethea)
- Sinn v. State, 693 N.E.2d 78 (Ind. Ct. App. 1998) (restitution orders reviewable on appeal when appropriate)
- Cotto v. State, 829 N.E.2d 520 (Ind. 2005) (prior interactions with OWI and sentencing considerations)