Tommy Orlando Townsend, Sr. v. State of Indiana
2015 Ind. App. LEXIS 699
| Ind. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- Townsend and his wife separated; she moved to an apartment. On Easter he entered her apartment without permission, assaulted and stabbed her multiple times, confined her in his vehicle for hours, and she required trauma care.
- Townsend had taken multiple medications (Flexeril and Dimetapp, plus an unidentified pill) shortly before the crimes; experts later diagnosed anticholinergic intoxication with secondary psychosis and opined he was psychotic at the time of the offenses.
- Townsend raised an insanity defense and the trial court appointed two experts; both agreed he was psychotic but attributed it to voluntary medication use.
- The jury convicted Townsend of class A felony burglary and class B felony criminal confinement; other counts were vacated. He was sentenced to consecutive terms totaling 55 years.
- On appeal Townsend challenged (1) the jury’s rejection of his insanity defense, (2) the trial court’s demeanor instruction choices, (3) the court’s refusal to treat temporary medication-induced psychosis as a mitigating circumstance, and (4) the appropriateness of his sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Townsend) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether jury rejection of insanity was contrary to law | Jury properly could find psychosis was caused by voluntary intoxication, which is not a mental disease/defect under the insanity statute | Townsend argued he was legally insane (experts said psychotic) and met burden to show insanity | Held: No reversal — evidence conflicted and supported conclusion psychosis was from voluntary intoxication, so jury rejection was permissible |
| Whether trial court erred by giving State’s demeanor instruction and refusing defendant’s version | Instruction appropriately permitted jury to consider demeanor as probative of sanity | Townsend argued his requested instruction (limiting pre/post-crime demeanor) should also be given; absence prejudiced him | Held: Any instructional error was harmless given strong evidence of voluntary intoxication; no prejudice shown |
| Whether trial court abused discretion by not finding temporary medication-induced psychosis as mitigating | State argued temporary, medication-induced psychosis was not a clearly supported mitigating circumstance | Townsend argued temporary insanity from meds should mitigate sentence | Held: No abuse — mitigating weight for mental illness is discretionary and here psychosis was temporary and contested by jury |
| Whether 55-year aggregate sentence is inappropriate under App. R. 7(B) | Sentence fits the aggravated facts (lying-in-wait, multiple stab wounds, confinement, prolonged denial of care) and offender’s limited criminal history supports it | Townsend argued sentence excessive given his character and medication-induced condition | Held: Sentence not inappropriate; Townsend failed to carry burden to show it was excessive |
Key Cases Cited
- Galloway v. State, 938 N.E.2d 699 (Ind. 2010) (demeanor evidence may inform insanity inquiries)
- Berry v. State, 969 N.E.2d 35 (Ind. 2012) (temporary intoxication ordinarily not a mental disease; limits on voluntary-intoxication-based insanity claims)
- Jackson v. State, 402 N.E.2d 947 (Ind. 1980) (temporary mental incapacity from voluntary intoxication is not a defense)
- Thompson v. State, 804 N.E.2d 1146 (Ind. 2004) (standard for overturning jury rejection of insanity: reverse only if evidence unconflicted and leads only to insanity)
- Inman v. State, 4 N.E.3d 190 (Ind. 2014) (harmlessness standard for instructional error)
- Anglemyer v. State, 868 N.E.2d 482 (Ind. 2007) (defendant bears burden to show sentencing errors; appellate review of mitigators/aggravators)