Horton v. State, 2011 Ind. LEXIS 564

Horton was convicted after a jury trial of six Class A and three Class C child molesting counts, and sentenced to an executed term of 324 years.
He appealed on grounds that certain evidence was improperly admitted and that the sentence was inappropriate and an abuse of discretion.
The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed all aspects; the Supreme Court granted transfer to address the sentencing claims.
The underlying facts show Horton's six-month course of sexual abuse of his girlfriend's seven-year-old daughter, including multiple acts and resulting injuries and herpes.
The trial court identified aggravators (trust, duration and severity of acts, herpes, denial of innocence, and placement in the victim's bedroom) and a mitigating factor (minimal prior history).
The Supreme Court revised Horton’s aggregate sentence from 324 years to 110 years, with specific counts serving consecutively or concurrently as detailed in the opinion, and remanded for an amended sentencing order.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the aggregate sentence was inappropriate.	Horton argues the sentence is overly harsh and beyond appellate review.	State contends the sentence is warranted by the gravity and duration of the offenses.	Yes; the Court revised the sentence to 110 years.
Whether aggravating and mitigating factors supported an enhanced sentence.	Horton contends factors were misapplied or underemphasized in mitigation.	State maintains aggravators justify substantial enhancement despite minimal prior history.	Aggravators supported substantial enhancement; mitigator of de minimis history noted.
Whether the sentencing approach should follow Cardwell v. State framework for aggregate punishment.	Horton asserts appellate review should focus on individual counts.	State urges aggregate focus to preserve deterrence and overall balance.	Court endorses aggregate-view approach consistent with Cardwell.

Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219 (Ind. 2008) (focus on aggregate sentence rather than individual counts)
Akard v. State, 937 N.E.2d 811 (Ind. 2010) (upholds enhanced sentences in similar molestation cases)
Harris v. State, 897 N.E.2d 927 (Ind. 2008) (example of long-term sentences upheld under appellate review)
Smith v. State, 889 N.E.2d 261 (Ind. 2008) (example of 60-year executed sentence in similar context)
Monroe v. State, 886 N.E.2d 578 (Ind. 2008) (examples of substantial sentences reviewed for appropriateness)
Walker v. State, 747 N.E.2d 536 (Ind. 2001) (prior-manifestly unreasonable standard cited in comparable cases)