Ricky L. Sands v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
90A02-1610-CR-2309
| Ind. Ct. App. | May 10, 2017Background
- Ricky L. Sands, the stepfather of victim P.P., pled guilty to multiple offenses arising from repeated sexual abuse of P.P. when P.P. was 12–13, including oral sex, fondling, showing pornography, and providing alcohol/marijuana to facilitate abuse; Sands also secretly recorded his stepdaughter I.P.
- Charges: two class A child-molesting counts, two class C child-molesting counts, one class D dissemination to minors, and two class A misdemeanors for contributing to a minor’s delinquency; habitual-offender allegation was dismissed as part of the plea deal.
- Plea agreement left sentencing to the court but required concurrent sentences; Sands pled guilty and admitted some conduct in a written statement.
- At sentencing the court admitted victim statements, an officer incident report, and Sands’s statement; the court found multiple aggravators (position of trust, threats, grooming behavior, providing drugs/alcohol, physical abuse, secret recording) and limited mitigators (provider role, acceptance of responsibility, prior victimization).
- The trial court imposed concurrent sentences that produced an aggregate executed sentence of 50 years and ordered no contact with the victims and Sands’s biological children; Sands appealed, arguing the aggregate sentence was inappropriate.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 50-year aggregate sentence is inappropriate under Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B) | State: sentence is supported by nature of offenses and offender’s character (aggravators) | Sands: sentence excessive given his age, prior positive role in family, limited recent criminal history, and plea concessions | Court affirmed: defendant failed to carry burden to show sentence inappropriate in light of offenses and character |
| Whether no-contact order as to Sands’s biological children lacked nexus to crimes | State: no-contact order permissible to protect children given grooming and CHINS actions | Sands: argued no nexus to biological children J.S. and R.S. | Court affirmed: record shows nexus (CHINS removals, grooming concerns); no-contact order upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- Childress v. State, 848 N.E.2d 1073 (Ind. 2006) (defendant bears burden to show sentence is inappropriate)
- Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219 (Ind. 2008) (appellate review should focus on aggregate sentence)
- Hines v. State, 30 N.E.3d 1216 (Ind. 2015) (factors for assessing appropriateness include culpability and harm to victims)
- Sharp v. State, 970 N.E.2d 647 (Ind. 2012) (credit time status may be considered in appellate sentence review)
- Howe v. State, 25 N.E.3d 210 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (no-contact orders must have a nexus to the crime being sentenced)