Mark A. Drescher v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
19A01-1602-CR-298
| Ind. Ct. App. | Oct 17, 2016Background
- Mark Drescher and Eugenia Neukam were in an on‑and‑off relationship; they broke up on December 27, 2014.
- Drescher asked Neukam to marry him, give up custody of her children, leave her home, and travel with him; she refused.
- During a drive, Drescher became violent: pulled her hair, hit her, banged her head into the truck window, dragged her into a ditch, and threatened her and her family.
- Drescher produced a knife, poked Neukam in the chest, cut her in multiple places, and threatened to mutilate her breasts; Neukam feared for her life and sought emergency treatment.
- Neukam gave a video‑recorded statement and sworn affidavit; at trial she largely recanted, but the State impeached her with the prior statement.
- A jury acquitted Drescher of battery but convicted him of Level 5 felony intimidation; the trial court sentenced him to the maximum six‑year term.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for Level 5 intimidation | State: Drescher communicated threats with intent to place Neukam in fear of retaliation for refusing his demand | Drescher: Evidence insufficient; challenges the weight/credibility of State's proof | Affirmed — a reasonable juror could find threats and intent beyond a reasonable doubt |
| Appropriateness of six‑year sentence under Rule 7(B) | State: Sentence within statutory range and justified by offense and defendant's history | Drescher: Sentence inappropriate given nature of offense and his character | Affirmed — sentence not inappropriate given violent conduct and extensive criminal history |
Key Cases Cited
- Gray v. State, 957 N.E.2d 171 (Ind. 2011) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- Bailey v. State, 907 N.E.2d 1003 (Ind. 2009) (affirming conviction if reasonable jury could find guilt beyond reasonable doubt)
- Knapp v. State, 9 N.E.3d 1274 (Ind. 2014) (appellate review under Rule 7(B) gives substantial deference to trial court)
- Chambers v. State, 989 N.E.2d 1257 (Ind. 2013) (explaining the role of appellate review in adjusting outlier sentences)