Thomas A. Roper v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.), 09A04-1704-CR-718

In April 2014 Roper pointed a firearm at his then‑roommate during an argument; police were dispatched and he was later charged with multiple offenses.
The State charged six counts (including intimidation with a deadly weapon, pointing a firearm, drug offenses, and criminal confinement); Roper pled guilty to Count I (intimidation, Class C) and the remaining counts were dismissed.
At sentencing the court accepted an open guilty plea and imposed the maximum eight‑year term (statutory range for Class C: 2–8 years; advisory 4 years).
The trial court found as mitigation Roper’s late plea, but found aggravators: an extensive criminal and delinquency history and recent probation violation, which substantially outweighed mitigation.
Roper argued the court abused its discretion by not recognizing his mental health as a mitigating factor and that his eight‑year sentence is inappropriate given his mental illness and the limited facts.
The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding the record did not clearly support mental‑health mitigation nor did it show the sentence was inappropriate in light of Roper’s character and the offense.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Roper)	Held
Whether the trial court abused its sentencing discretion by failing to consider mental‑health evidence as mitigation	Trial court reasonably declined to find mitigation where diagnoses were self‑reported, contradicted by earlier testimony, unsupported by records, and not tied to the offense	Roper argued his diagnosed bipolar disorder/paranoid schizophrenia explained recent behavior and should mitigate sentence	Court held no abuse: mental‑health evidence was not significant and clearly supported, nor tied to the crime, so court permissibly rejected mitigation
Whether the eight‑year sentence is inappropriate under App. R. 7(B)	Sentence appropriate given defendant's severe criminal history, repeated probation violations, deceit, and anger issues	Roper sought reduction to 5 years (with partial suspension) based on mental illness and limited facts of the offense	Court held sentence not inappropriate: facts of offense limited but Roper’s character and criminal record justify maximum term

Anglemyer v. State, 868 N.E.2d 482 (Ind. 2007) (standard for appellate review of sentencing and required sentencing statement analysis)
Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219 (Ind. 2008) (scope and purpose of Appellate Rule 7(B) sentence‑review)
Weedman v. State, 21 N.E.3d 873 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (mental illness is a mitigating factor only when supported by record and relevant nexus to offense)
Townsend v. State, 45 N.E.3d 821 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (mental illness mitigation requires longstanding history or jury finding of mental illness)
Phelps v. State, 969 N.E.2d 1009 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (trial court not required to explain why it rejects proffered mitigation)