Justin J. Clark v. State of Indiana
2014 Ind. App. LEXIS 494
Ind. Ct. App.2014Background
- Clark was convicted of Class A felony robbery resulting in bodily injury and sentenced to 45 years.
- The State charged Clark with multiple counts; he pled guilty to Count I and the State dismissed the rest and habitual offender.
- The trial court found multiple aggravating factors, including Pfeiffer’s injuries, premeditation, Clark’s criminal history, and ongoing jail behavior problems.
- Clark cooperated with law enforcement and testified against Miller, receiving a benefit from the plea deal.
- Clark appealed claiming the sentence was inappropriate under Appellate Rule 7(B) in light of the offense and his character, including Miller’s greater role.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was Clark's sentence inappropriate under 7(B) given the offense and his character? | Clark argues Miller had a greater role and he is less culpable. | Clark contends the sentence is excessive and not warranted by his background. | Sentence not inappropriate; affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Childress v. State, 848 N.E.2d 1073 (Ind. 2006) (standard for reviewing 7(B) challenges)
- Moss v. State, 13 N.E.3d 440 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (consideration of factors in inappropriate-sentence review)
- Stewart v. State, 866 N.E.2d 858 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (deference to trial court sentencing decisions)
- Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219 (Ind. 2008) (guiding principles for sentencing review)
- Anglemyer v. State, 875 N.E.2d 218 (Ind. 2007) (mitigating-factor considerations and plea-bargain impact)
- Trowbridge v. State, 717 N.E.2d 138 (Ind. 1999) (courts may consider comparing sentences among similarly situated offenders)