Bryan Scott v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
49A02-1706-CR-1245
| Ind. Ct. App. | Nov 7, 2017Background
- On June 6, 2016 Bryan Scott ran toward a group on an apartment patio carrying a pipe or crowbar, yelling "I want my money," struck Edward Hunter in the lip, face, and back, and left with the weapon.
- Officer photographed Hunter’s injuries; Hunter identified Scott from a photo a week later.
- State charged Scott with battery by means of a deadly weapon (Level 5 felony); Scott waived a jury trial.
- After a May 12, 2017 bench trial, the court convicted Scott of the lesser-included offense of battery as a Class A misdemeanor.
- At sentencing the court noted Scott’s prior drug-related history and his pretrial detention; defense requested a suspended sentence.
- Court sentenced Scott to 365 days with 225 days suspended and credited 140 days served. Scott appealed, arguing the court abused its discretion by failing to treat his pretrial detention as a mitigating factor.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court abused discretion by not finding pretrial detention a mitigating factor | State: sentence was within court’s discretion and properly supported | Scott: pretrial detention should be a mitigating factor making additional probation inappropriate | Court: No abuse; Scott waived the argument by not raising it at sentencing and failed to cite authority; court need not detail or weigh mitigators under advisory scheme |
Key Cases Cited
- Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219 (Ind. 2008) (sentencing decisions lie within trial court's discretion)
- Anglemyer v. State, 868 N.E.2d 482 (Ind. 2007) (standards for appellate review of sentencing; reasons for sentence must not be unsupported)
- Gross v. State, 22 N.E.3d 863 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (definition of abuse of discretion in sentencing)
- Sandleben v. State, 22 N.E.3d 782 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (trial court need not explain why a proposed mitigator does not exist or was given little weight)
- Carter v. State, 711 N.E.2d 835 (Ind. 1999) (failure to raise a mitigating circumstance at sentencing waives it on appeal)
- Creekmore v. State, 853 N.E.2d 523 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (same)
- Pierce v. State, 29 N.E.3d 1258 (Ind. 2015) (failure to support appellate arguments with authority waives them)