Douglas Flagle v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
43A05-1704-CR-875
| Ind. Ct. App. | Aug 29, 2017Background
- In 2009 Flagle pled guilty to Class C felony non-support of a dependent; plea conditioned on reducing arrearage to reclassify conviction and limit sentence exposure.
- Flagle failed to appear at the scheduled 2010 sentencing and did not sign probation terms; a warrant issued and case remained pending until 2011 when he was sentenced in Kosciusko County to eight years (two executed, six suspended).
- While serving the executed portion elsewhere, Flagle was in an Elkhart County work-release program and in April 2015 failed to return; he was later charged with a Level 6 felony for failure to return to lawful detention and turned himself in months later in Michigan.
- In February 2016 Flagle’s Kosciusko probation officer filed a petition to revoke based on the failure to return to work-release and failure to sign/report to probation; at revocation hearing Flagle admitted the violations and had child support arrears exceeding $50,000 with virtually no recent payments.
- The trial court revoked five and one-half years of Flagle’s six-year suspended sentence (giving a six-month reduction for candor) and ordered him to serve that time in the Department of Correction; Flagle appealed claiming the revocation was an abuse of discretion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion in revoking 5.5 years of Flagle’s suspended sentence | The State: multiple serious breaches — failure to appear, absconding from community corrections, new felony charge, and large unpaid child-support arrearage — justify full revocation | Flagle: violation was relatively minor and the resulting revoked term was unduly severe | No abuse of discretion; revocation of 5.5 years affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Prewitt v. State, 878 N.E.2d 184 (Ind. 2007) (establishing abuse-of-discretion standard for probation revocation and deference to trial court's decision to revoke suspended sentences)
- Jones v. State, 838 N.E.2d 1146 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (upholding substantial execution of previously suspended sentence after probation violations)
- Jones v. State, 885 N.E.2d 1286 (Ind. 2008) (noting that Rule 7(B) inappropriate-sentence analysis does not apply to post-sentence probation revocation review)