Gerald Lynn West v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
84A04-1611-CR-2535
| Ind. Ct. App. | Apr 12, 2017Background
- On Oct. 13, 2015, Gerald Lynn West was stopped by police; a K-9 alerted and officers found 357.38 grams of crystal meth, 2.58 grams of marijuana, scales, and a pipe in his van.
- West struck an officer and fled; he was tasered and subdued by multiple officers; a juvenile was present in the vehicle.
- West was charged with multiple counts including Dealing in Methamphetamine (Level 2), Maintaining a Common Nuisance (Level 6), Battery (Level 5), and Possession of Marijuana (Class A misdemeanor); a jury convicted him.
- To avoid double jeopardy, the court entered convictions on four counts and imposed concurrent sentences: 30 years (Level 2), 3 years (Level 5), 2 years (Level 6), and 180 days (misdemeanor) — aggregate 30 years.
- West sought appellate revision of his sentence under Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B), arguing it was inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and his character.
- The trial court relied on the large quantity of methamphetamine, the assault on an officer, the presence of a juvenile, and West’s lengthy criminal history (including prior federal and state drug convictions and suggested misconduct while incarcerated) in imposing the maximum Level 2 sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether West’s aggregate 30-year sentence is inappropriate under Ind. App. R. 7(B) | The State: sentence is appropriate given the offense severity, large drug quantity, assault on officer, juvenile present, and defendant’s lengthy criminal history | West: sentence is excessive and inappropriate in light of his character and circumstances | Court affirmed: sentence not inappropriate under Rule 7(B) |
Key Cases Cited
- Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219 (Ind. 2008) (standard and purpose of appellate sentence revision under Rule 7(B))
- Serino v. State, 798 N.E.2d 852 (Ind. 2003) (appellate review for inappropriate sentences requires consideration of nature of offense and character of offender)
- Cotto v. State, 829 N.E.2d 520 (Ind. 2005) (arrest record alone does not prove criminal history but may inform character assessment)