Craig Allen Decker v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
18A04-1705-CR-1097
| Ind. Ct. App. | Dec 5, 2017Background
- In 2013 Decker was charged with multiple counts of child molesting and a count of intimidation; the State and Decker agreed to a plea where he would plead guilty to one count of child molesting as a Class B felony in exchange for dismissal of remaining counts.
- At the October 5, 2016 plea hearing Decker confirmed understanding of the plea; the court took the plea under advisement pending a pre-sentence investigation.
- Six months later Decker moved to withdraw his guilty plea, asserting innocence and claiming new/exculpatory evidence and witness testimony (including an ‘‘alibi’’ from a former girlfriend, Friskey).
- At the withdrawal hearing Decker testified he had been intoxicated the night of the offense and possibly under the influence of marijuana when he pleaded guilty; the trial court found Decker not credible.
- The trial court denied the motion to withdraw, citing lack of credibility, a prior recorded police interview in which Decker confessed, Decker’s pragmatic reasons for pleading, and prejudice to the State from delay; Decker was sentenced to 15 years.
- On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed, holding the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying withdrawal of the plea.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether withdrawal of guilty plea was required to correct a manifest injustice | State: plea was knowing, voluntary, and court followed statutory procedures; no manifest injustice shown | Decker: plea was involuntary due to intoxication and new/exculpatory evidence (alibi); asserts innocence | Denied — court found plea knowing/voluntary, Decker not credible, prior confession undermines claim; no manifest injustice shown |
| Whether trial court erred in crediting witness credibility (Friskey and Decker) | State: trial court properly assessed credibility and rejected alibi and intoxication claims | Decker: Friskey’s testimony supports alibi and suggests victim influence; Decker claims intoxication at plea | Denied — appellate deference to trial court’s credibility findings; court found Friskey and Decker not credible |
| Whether passage of time and resulting prejudice to the State required denial of withdrawal | State: substantial prejudice due to delay and fading child witnesses | Decker: did not contend State lacked ability to proceed; sought withdrawal to pursue innocence claim | Held that trial court reasonably found substantial prejudice from delay (even if arguendo prejudice not proven, credibility issues suffice) |
| Whether any new legal development (e.g., constitutional change) warranted plea withdrawal | State: no new law or defense emerged | Decker: likened case to Turner where new constitutional law justified withdrawal | Denied — no change in law here and any alibi was not newly available |
Key Cases Cited
- Carter v. State, 739 N.E.2d 126 (Ind. 2000) (standard that knowing, voluntary plea bars later innocence claim absent manifest injustice)
- Coomer v. State, 652 N.E.2d 60 (Ind. 1995) (presumption in favor of trial court’s denial of plea-withdrawal; high hurdle for appellant)
- Rhoades v. State, 675 N.E.2d 698 (Ind. 1996) (abuse-of-discretion standard)
- Moshenek v. State, 868 N.E.2d 419 (Ind. 2007) (trial court best suited to weigh evidence and credibility)
- Diaz v. State, 934 N.E.2d 1089 (Ind. 2010) (voluntary and intelligent plea test quoting Alford)
- North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (U.S. 1970) (plea validity measured by voluntariness and intelligence)
- Turner v. State, 843 N.E.2d 938 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (withdrawing plea where new constitutional law created credible new defense)
- Vonderschmidt v. State, 81 N.E.2d 782 (Ind. 1948) (intoxication at plea may require withdrawal if credible evidence of incapacity)