Jessica McCain v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
79A02-1703-CR-616
| Ind. Ct. App. | Sep 15, 2017Background
- Jessica McCain, age 23, pleaded guilty to one count of Level 1 felony child molesting for placing her mouth on her one‑year‑old son's penis while bathing him and videotaping the act at her boyfriend’s urging.
- The conduct was intentional, recorded on a borrowed cellphone, and McCain acknowledged the child was under twelve and that she was sexually aroused; she planned to send the video to her boyfriend.
- McCain had no criminal history, admitted responsibility to police, and entered an open plea to the highest charge; sentencing was left to the trial court.
- The trial court imposed a 40‑year sentence (38 years executed, 2 years suspended to probation), within the statutory range of 20–50 years for a Level 1 felony; the advisory sentence is 30 years.
- McCain appealed under Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B), arguing the 40‑year term is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and her character.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (McCain) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether McCain’s 40‑year sentence is inappropriate under Ind. App. R. 7(B) | The sentence is within the statutory range and justified by the deplorable nature of child molestation. | The sentence is excessive given the advisory 30‑year term, McCain’s lack of criminal history, acceptance of responsibility, and that the offense was a single incident influenced by her boyfriend. | The court held the 40‑year sentence is inappropriate and remanded for imposition of the 30‑year advisory sentence. |
Key Cases Cited
- Thompson v. State, 5 N.E.3d 383 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (describing appellate revision power under Rule 7(B))
- Akard v. State, 937 N.E.2d 811 (Ind. 2010) (appellate authority to affirm or reduce sentence)
- Davidson v. State, 926 N.E.2d 1023 (Ind. 2010) (consideration of all penal consequences in review)
- Fonner v. State, 876 N.E.2d 340 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (standard that sentence must be shown "inappropriate")
- Anglemyer v. State, 868 N.E.2d 482 (Ind. 2007) (burden on defendant to show inappropriateness)
- Childress v. State, 848 N.E.2d 1073 (Ind. 2006) (factors for appropriateness review: culpability, severity, harm)
- Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219 (Ind. 2008) (assessment factors for sentence appropriateness)
- Payton v. State, 818 N.E.2d 493 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (maximum sentences appropriate for worst offenders)
- Buchanan v. State, 767 N.E.2d 967 (Ind. 2002) (discussion of maximum sentences for severe offenders)