Cathy L. Sizemore-Roessler v. State of Indiana (mem.dec.)
15A01-1609-CR-2090
| Ind. Ct. App. | Apr 26, 2017Background
- In 2015 police investigated methamphetamine manufacturing on property owned by Cathy Sizemore-Roessler after a tip and NPLEX records showing large pseudoephedrine purchases by her and residents of her property.
- Law enforcement placed a tracking device on Sizemore-Roessler’s car, observed her driving others to pharmacies, and found lithium batteries, Coleman fuel, receipts, and a shopping list in her vehicle.
- A June 1, 2015 search of the property uncovered an active meth lab in a shed, methamphetamine in the shed and house, precursor materials, and four handguns in her vehicle.
- The combined purchases by occupants equaled 162.2 grams of pseudoephedrine over three months; officers testified that would yield well over ten grams of methamphetamine.
- Sizemore-Roessler was tried pro se, convicted after a bench trial of Level 2 felony conspiracy to commit dealing in methamphetamine (>10 grams), and sentenced to 12 years executed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence to support conspiracy conviction | State: circumstantial evidence (large precursor purchases, transportation of buyers, overt acts) shows Sizemore-Roessler agreed and acted to facilitate dealing | Sizemore-Roessler: she did not participate in an agreement to manufacture or deal; mere presence/association insufficient | Court: Affirmed — evidence (purchases, transport, threats, admissions, lab on property) permitted inference of agreement and overt acts |
| Appropriateness of 12-year sentence | State: 12 years is below the Level 2 advisory (17.5) and reasonable given active participation, danger, and quantity involved | Sizemore-Roessler: sentence inappropriate; less culpable than codefendants who received shorter terms | Court: Affirmed — sentence well below advisory, defendant was an active participant and posed risks; not inappropriate under App. R. 7(B) |
Key Cases Cited
- Atteberry v. State, 911 N.E.2d 601 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (standard for sufficiency review: do not reweigh evidence)
- Erkins v. State, 13 N.E.3d 400 (Ind. 2014) (agreement and intent for conspiracy may be inferred from circumstantial evidence and overt acts)
- Drane v. State, 867 N.E.2d 144 (Ind. 2007) (evidence sufficient if reasonable inference supports conviction; need not overcome every hypothesis of innocence)
- Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219 (Ind. 2008) (Appellate Rule 7(B) authority for appellate sentence review)
- Knapp v. State, 9 N.E.3d 1274 (Ind. 2014) (appellate courts may revise sentences under appellate rule but review is deferential)
- Stephenson v. State, 29 N.E.3d 111 (Ind. 2015) (factors showing when appellate court should depart from deference in reviewing sentence)