Matthew Aron Barricks v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
79A02-1706-CR-1307
| Ind. Ct. App. | Nov 7, 2017Background
- In August 2016, Matthew Aron Barricks (born 1991) exchanged Facebook messages with S.S., who said she was about to turn 15; Barricks sent an explicit photo and solicited sexual activity.
- In September 2016 the State charged multiple counts including several counts of sexual misconduct with a minor and one count of child solicitation (Level 4).
- Pursuant to a plea agreement, Barricks pled guilty to one count of child solicitation (Level 4) and the State dismissed the remaining counts; the court retained sentencing discretion.
- At sentencing the court considered victim-impact, Barricks’s limited criminal history (juvenile contacts and a 2014 misdemeanor), employment history, family support, and statements reflecting lack of remorse.
- The court found aggravators (limited criminal history/juvenile contacts, nature of the crime, untruthfulness to law enforcement, lack of remorse) and mitigators (guilty plea, victim spared testimony, some employment, family support) to be in balance and imposed a six-year advisory sentence: three years executed in DOC and three years suspended (first year on community corrections).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Barricks) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion in sentencing | Trial court properly weighed aggravators/mitigators; no abuse | Court failed to find/assign mitigating weight to hardship on his son and argued criminal history could be mitigating | No abuse of discretion; court considered hardship and was not required to find undue hardship absent special circumstances; criminal history could be aggravating and court’s balancing was permissible |
| Whether the sentence is inappropriate under Ind. Appellate Rule 7(B) | Advisory sentence reasonable given offense nature and offender’s character | Sentence is inappropriate: short internet contact, willing participant, strong family support, limited prior misdemeanor | Sentence not inappropriate; defendant failed to meet burden to show advisory sentence (6 years, 3 executed) is inappropriate in light of offense and character |
Key Cases Cited
- Anglemyer v. State, 868 N.E.2d 482 (Ind. 2007) (sets abuse-of-discretion framework for sentencing review)
- Anglemyer v. State, 875 N.E.2d 218 (Ind. 2007) (clarification on rehearing)
- Dowdell v. State, 720 N.E.2d 1146 (Ind. 1999) (absence of special circumstances, incarceration does not automatically create a mitigating hardship)
- Rogers v. State, 878 N.E.2d 269 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (trial court not required to accept defendant’s view of mitigating factors or assign them particular weight)
- Benefield v. State, 904 N.E.2d 239 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (incarceration ordinarily imposes hardship on others; special circumstances required to make that mitigating)
- Childress v. State, 848 N.E.2d 1073 (Ind. 2006) (burden on defendant to show sentence inappropriate under Rule 7(B))