976 N.E.2d 783
Ind. Ct. App.2012Background
- Grider was charged in three causes with two forgery counts (Class C), four theft counts (Class D), and two check fraud counts (Class D).
- She pled guilty in June 2010 under a single plea agreement that its sentence would be open to the Court with all counts to run concurrently.
- Grider began Drug Court participation in May 2011; she absconded and was terminated in September 2011.
- At a May 2011 Drug Court evaluation, sentencing was deferred; later, the court initially rejected the plea and ordered a jury trial, then reinstated the plea agreement at a subsequent hearing.
- At sentencing in November 2011, the court imposed aggregate sentences totaling 19 years, with some consecutive terms across the three causes.
- Grider appeals, arguing the court violated the plea agreement by imposing consecutive sentences instead of concurrent ones.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the plea agreement requires fully concurrent sentencing across all counts | Grider; the language means all counts run concurrently | State; court may order consecutive sentences despite concurrent language | Consecutive sentences improper; must be concurrent across all counts |
Key Cases Cited
- Lee v. State, 816 N.E.2d 35 (Ind. 2004) (plea agreements are contracts binding court and parties)
- Pannarale v. State, 638 N.E.2d 1247 (Ind. 1994) (court bound by plea terms; contract interpretation governs)
- Griffin v. State, 756 N.E.2d 572 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001) (contract interpretation of plea terms; ambiguity rules)
- Time Warner Entm’t Co. v. Whiteman, 802 N.E.2d 894 (Ind. 2004) (ambiguity construed against drafter (State))
- United States v. Baird, 218 F.3d 221 (3d Cir. 2000) (relied on for strict construction against government)