Jhontay L. Whitesides v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
84A05-1703-CR-516
| Ind. Ct. App. | Sep 27, 2017Background
- Whitesides pleaded guilty to Level 3 felony armed robbery and criminal confinement and received a 10-year sentence: 6 years executed in Community Corrections (work release) and 4 years suspended to probation.
- Between Oct 2016 and Jan 2017, Whitesides committed multiple violations: escape (unknown whereabouts >2 hours), repeated tobacco use, positive alcohol test, hospitalization for alcohol use leading to job loss, punctuality/attendance and refusal-to-follow-order violations, and possession of a synthetic drug.
- The State filed a petition to revoke direct placement and/or probation; Whitesides admitted all allegations at the revocation hearing.
- The trial court revoked his direct placement and probation and ordered execution of seven years of the original sentence in the Department of Correction, suspending three years to formal probation, and recommended placement in the PLUS program.
- Whitesides argued the court abused its discretion by ignoring mitigation (his addiction) and by ordering incarceration instead of treatment; the court noted prior treatment orders and that Community Corrections recommended he was not appropriate for their programs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion by ordering Whitesides to serve seven years in DOC after probation/direct-placement violations | State: Court properly revoked probation and executed suspended sentence after admissions | Whitesides: Court should have prioritized treatment over incarceration and considered addiction mitigation | Court: No abuse of discretion; revocation and seven-year execution affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Jones v. State, 838 N.E.2d 1146 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (standard of review for probation revocation and sentencing is abuse of discretion)
- Berry v. State, 904 N.E.2d 365 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (abuse of discretion defined)
- Gosha v. State, 873 N.E.2d 660 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (a single violation can support revocation)
- Treece v. State, 10 N.E.3d 52 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (probationary placement is a matter of grace, not a right)
- Sandlin v. State, 823 N.E.2d 1197 (Ind. 2005) (affirming execution of suspended sentence after probation violation)
- Cox v. State, 850 N.E.2d 485 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (upholding execution of suspended sentence following violations)
- Sanders v. State, 825 N.E.2d 952 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (affirming service of suspended sentence after admitted violations)