Jonathan D. Harness v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
55A01-1512-CR-2231
| Ind. Ct. App. | Mar 16, 2017Background
- Jonathan Harness pleaded guilty to two counts of Class C felony battery resulting in serious bodily injury to his adopted daughter A.H.; the State dismissed other charges under a plea agreement.
- Facts: Harness pushed/struck A.H., causing loss of consciousness on one occasion and throwing her into a wall with a protruding nail on another; A.H. sustained permanent scars.
- Sentencing: Trial court imposed concurrent six-year terms (advisory sentence is four years), with four years executed and two years suspended to probation.
- Mitigators found: Harness’s abusive childhood, health problems, lack of criminal history, and potential hardship to family.
- Aggravators found: Victim was in Harness’s care/custody and the risk of recurrence given Harness’s background; court concluded aggravators outweighed mitigators.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether sentence is inappropriate under Ind. Appellate Rule 7(B) | State: sentence within statutory range and justified by aggravators | Harness: sentence inappropriate given mitigators, low risk to reoffend, eligibility for home detention; requests more suspension to probation | Affirmed: six-year concurrent sentences (4 executed, 2 suspended) not inappropriate given severity and permanent injuries |
| Whether requiring polygraph exams as a probation condition was an abuse of discretion | State: condition is rehabilitative and aids supervision | Harness: polygraph requirement is improper/coercive | Affirmed: court may require polygraph when reasonably related to rehabilitation and supervision |
Key Cases Cited
- Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219 (Ind. 2008) (Rule 7(B) inappropriateness standard and factors for reviewing sentences)
- Anglemyer v. State, 868 N.E.2d 482 (Ind. 2007) (advisory sentence as starting point for sentencing review)
- Patton v. State, 580 N.E.2d 693 (Ind. Ct. App. 1991) (probationers may be required to submit to polygraph exams if reasonably related to rehabilitation)
- Gil v. State, 988 N.E.2d 1231 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (deference to trial court sentencing decisions)
- Stewart v. State, 866 N.E.2d 858 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (discussion of appellate deference in sentencing)
- Reid v. State, 876 N.E.2d 1114 (Ind. 2007) (defendant bears burden to show sentence is inappropriate)