Case Information
*1 MEMORANDUM DECISION
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D),
this Memorandum Decision shall not be
regarded as precedent or cited before any
court except for the purpose of establishing
the defense of res judicata, collateral
estoppel, or the law of the case.
A TTORNEY FOR A PPELLANT A TTORNEYS FOR A PPELLEE Karen M. Heard Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
Vanderburgh County Attorney General of Indiana Public Defenders Office Christina D. Pace Evansville, Indiana Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana I N T H E
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA Christi Lee Scott, July 18, 2017 Court of Appeals Case No. Appellant-Defendant,
82A01-1612-CR-2939 v. Appeal from the Vanderburgh Circuit Court State of Indiana, The Honorable Kelli E. Fink Magistrate Appellee-Plaintiff
Trial Court Cause No. 82C01-1603-F4-1792 Kirsch, Judge.
Christie Lee Scott entered a plea of guilty to Burglary as a Level 4 felony [1] and
Theft as a Level 6 felony. [2] She was sentenced to concurrent sentences six years and two years. Contending that her sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature of her offenses and her character, she now appeals. Concluding that her sentence is not inappropriate, we affirm.
Facts and Procedural History On March 25, 2016, Scott knocked on the door of the residence of Tim
Crabtree and asked him for money or a cigarette. Crabtree declined. Scott left, but returned a short time later accompanied by Jermon Weathers. Crabtree felt uncomfortable and retrieved his gun before answering the door. Scott and Weathers pushed past Crabtree and entered the house. When they would not leave, Crabtree left and went to a neighbor’s house where he called 911. Police responded and apprehended Scott and Weathers a short time later in possession of a laptop computer, cell phone and loose change that they had taken from Crabtree ’s home . Scott pleaded guilty to Burglary and Theft. The trial court found that the
aggravating factor of her criminal history outweighed the mitigating factors of *3 accepting responsibility and pleading guilty, expressing remorse and taking steps to seek help.
Discussion and Decision Article 7, Sections 4 and 6 of the Indiana Constitution authorizes independent
appellate review and revision of criminal sentences. Trainor v. State , 950 N.E.2d 352, 355 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011), trans. denied. This authority is implemented by Indiana Appellate Rule 7 (B) which provides, “The Court may revise a sentence authorized by statute if , after due consideration of the trial court’s decision, the Court finds that the sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense or the character of the offender.” The defendant bears the burden of persuading this court that his or her sentence is inappropriate. Childress v. State , 848 N.E. 1073, 1080 (Ind. 2006). Looking at the nature of her offense, we see that she knew her victim in this
case, that he had helped her in the past, and that, when he declined to give her money or a cigarette on this occasion, she returned with a companion and forced their way into the victim’s residence. They stole a laptop computer, a cell phone, lottery tickets, and loose change. Looking at her character, we see that she has an extensive criminal history
which started in 1991. Included in that history are four felony convictions and twenty-nine misdemeanor convictions. *4 Scott has not met her burden of persuading us that her six-year sentence is
inappropriate in light of the nature of her offenses or her character. Accordingly, the sentence is affirmed. Affirmed.
Mathias, J., and Altice, J., concur.
[1] See Ind. Code § 35-43-2-1.
[2] See Ind. Code § 35-43-4-2(a).