Richard Olufeni Ani-Obot v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
45A05-1701-CR-8
| Ind. Ct. App. | Jun 23, 2017Background
- On Feb. 22, 2016 Richard Olufeni Ani-Obot fled from police, threw a woman's phone into a pond, and knowingly or intentionally spat in Officer Ridgway’s face when taken into custody.
- Ani-Obot was on a pre-trial diversion program for multiple fraud/counterfeiting charges at the time of the incident.
- The State charged Ani-Obot with multiple counts across two causes, including Level 6 felony battery by bodily waste; plea agreement resolved both causes.
- Pursuant to a stipulated plea, Ani-Obot pled guilty to Level 6 felony battery by bodily waste; other charges were dismissed; parties agreed to a two-year cap on incarceration.
- At sentencing the trial court found aggravators (lengthy arrest history, multiple drug-related convictions) and two mitigators (likely to respond to short-term incarceration; admission of guilt), and imposed a two-year sentence (one year above the advisory).
- Ani-Obot appealed, arguing the trial court abused its discretion in weighing mitigators/aggravators and that the two-year sentence is inappropriate under Ind. Appellate Rule 7(B).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Ani-Obot) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court abused its discretion in weighing aggravating and mitigating factors | Trial court reasonably found aggravators (extensive arrests, drug convictions) outweighed mitigators; findings supported by record | Court improperly discounted employment, family/dependent obligations, and assigned excessive weight to prior contacts | No abuse of discretion; record supports the trial court’s findings and its sentencing statement |
| Whether the two-year sentence is inappropriate under Ind. Appellate Rule 7(B) | Sentence is appropriate given offense nature (spitting at officer while on diversion) and Ani-Obot’s character (extensive criminal history) | Two years (one year above advisory) is excessive given mitigators and less-egregious facts | Sentence is not inappropriate; defendant failed to carry burden to show disproportionality |
Key Cases Cited
- Anglemyer v. State, 868 N.E.2d 482 (Ind. 2007) (standards for abuse of discretion and required sentencing statement)
- Paul v. State, 888 N.E.2d 818 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (focus of Rule 7(B) review on nature of offense and offender's character)
- Cotto v. State, 829 N.E.2d 520 (Ind. 2005) (permissibility of considering arrests/contacts as evidence of character/risk of reoffending)
- Newsome v. State, 797 N.E.2d 293 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (employment is not necessarily a significant mitigating factor)
- Reese v. State, 939 N.E.2d 695 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (court not required to find family hardship a mitigator absent special circumstances)
- Dowdell v. State, 720 N.E.2d 1146 (Ind. 1999) (imprisonment's effect on children not automatically a mitigating factor)
- Sanchez v. State, 891 N.E.2d 174 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (defendant bears burden to show sentence inappropriate)