William Reiske v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.), 02A03-1702-CR-377

In Dec. 2013 Reiske, then adult, plied 17-year-old T.H. with multiple alcoholic shots and engaged in sexual acts while she was incapacitated; another participant recorded the act on Reiske’s phone.
Reiske was charged with two counts of criminal deviate conduct (Class B felonies, later merged) and contributing to the delinquency of a minor (Class A misdemeanor).
A jury convicted Reiske; at sentencing the court imposed the advisory ten-year term for the Class B felony, ordering eight years executed and two years suspended; the misdemeanor sentence ran concurrently.
Reiske appealed, stayed that appeal to pursue post-conviction relief and sentence modification, and obtained a psychological evaluation; he later filed a petition to modify his sentence.
At the modification hearing (about 14 months into incarceration) Reiske presented evidence of exemplary conduct in prison, vocational/educational progress, and strong community/family support; he apologized to the victim at that hearing.
The trial court acknowledged Reiske’s rehabilitation but denied modification, explaining punishment remained necessary and that the changes did not substantially alter the original sentencing calculus.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying Reiske's petition to modify/suspend his executed sentence	State: trial court properly considered factors and punishment still warranted	Reiske: exemplary prison conduct, rehabilitation, education, work, and support warrant sentence reduction/suspension	Court: No abuse of discretion; trial court reasonably concluded accomplishments did not justify modification after ~14 months

Carr v. State, 33 N.E.3d 358 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (abuse-of-discretion standard for sentence-modification rulings)
Banks v. State, 847 N.E.2d 1050 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (appellate review of sentencing/ modification decisions considers only evidence favorable to the judgment)