Baker v. State
| Decision Date | 27 June 2013 |
| Docket Number | No. 67A01–1301–PC–1.,67A01–1301–PC–1. |
| Citation | 990 N.E.2d 67 |
| Parties | Jeffrey BAKER, Appellant–Petitioner, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee–Respondent. |
| Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
990 N.E.2d 67
Jeffrey BAKER, Appellant–Petitioner,
v.
STATE of Indiana, Appellee–Respondent.
No. 67A01–1301–PC–1.
Court of Appeals of Indiana.
June 27, 2013.
Appeal from the Putnam Circuit Court; The Honorable Gary Miller, Senior Judge; Cause No. 67C01–0812–FA–276.
Cynthia M. Carter, Law Office of Cynthia M. Carter, LLC, Indianapolis, IN, Attorney for Appellant.
Gregory F. Zoeller, Attorney General of Indiana, James B. Martin, Deputy Attorney General, Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellee.
DARDEN, Senior Judge.
Jeffrey Baker appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. We affirm.
Baker raises two issues, which we consolidate and restate as: whether the postconviction court erred in determining that Baker did not receive ineffective assistance of trial counsel.
On the evening of December 5, 2008, a police officer and employees of the Indiana Department of Child Services (“DCS”) went to Baker's home to investigate an allegation that he had molested his then-thirteen-year-old stepdaughter, J.K. Baker initially allowed them to enter, but upon learning why they were there he became angry, interrupted their interview with J.K., and told them to leave. The DCS employees and the officer went outside, and soon other officers arrived. The DCS employees reentered the house when Baker's wife arrived home; at that point, Baker went outside with the officers. While he was outside, J.K. resumed her interview with the DCS employees and told them that Baker had molested her on at least two occasions.
Next, the officers took Baker to jail. After being Mirandized, he agreed to answer questions. During a recorded interview, Baker admitted that he had molested J.K. on “three or four” occasions. Direct Appeal Tr. p. 9.1 Although admitting to molestation, he denied that he had ever penetrated J.K.'s vagina. However, when officers told Baker that J.K. had said that he had penetrated her, Baker then said, “[S]he would know, I wouldn't.” PCR Ex. Vol., Petitioner's Ex. B.
On December 8, 2008, the State charged Baker with two counts of child molesting, one as a Class A felony and one as a Class C felony. Baker's attorney began plea negotiations with the State. The trial court set a cutoff date of April 16, 2009, to submit plea agreements for the court's approval. In addition, the court scheduled a trial for May 13, 2009.
The State initially offered a plea agreement with a thirty-year sentencing cap, which Baker's counsel rejected. After further negotiations, the State offered a second plea agreement with a sentence capped at twenty years in exchange for Baker's plea of guilty to the count of child molesting as a Class A felony. Under the circumstances, counsel thought the offer was “a very good plea.” PCR Tr. p. 11. On April 20, 2009, counsel sent Baker a letter outlining the proposed deal. Counsel advised Baker that it would be in his best interest to accept the plea deal, asserting that the victim's testimony along with Baker's own recorded statement would be used against him. He further informed Baker in the letter that if Baker went to trial and was found guilty, there was the possibility that the trial court might add additional time to the sentence because there were separate incidents and the victim was Baker's stepdaughter.
Next, counsel spoke with Baker to follow up on the letter. Baker rejected the plea agreement, continuing to assert that he had not committed child molesting as a Class A felony because he had not penetrated J.K. as the term was defined by statute. After further discussions on the subject, counsel went to the jail the next day and took along with him the deputy prosecutor, and they both met with Baker. The deputy prosecutor “laid out the case he was going to present” at trial. Id. Counsel conceded at the postconviction hearing that taking the deputy prosecutor to the jail was an “extraordinary” step, but he was not “having success” convincing Baker that the plea agreement was a good deal under the circumstances and wanted Baker “to hear ... from somebody else” that the deal “was in his best interest.” Id. at 11, 20.
Baker again rejected the plea deal, and counsel obtained from the trial court an extension of the plea agreement deadline. However, counsel believed that the extended deadline was not final because the judge was “one of the few judges that took a plea during trial.” Id. at 21. On April 23, 2009, the parties appeared for a final pre-trial conference, and in open court Baker again rejected the plea agreement.
On May 1, 2009, Baker filed a complaint with the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission (“the Commission”) concerning his attorney. The Commission dismissed the complaint. Baker's counsel was aware of the complaint and informed the trial court. Counsel considered withdrawing from the case but concluded that the filing of the complaint did not give rise to a conflict of interest.
On May 11, 2009, two days before trial, Baker's attorney took J.K .'s deposition. Baker was not present. Counsel told the post-conviction court that in general he preferred not to take depositions of alleged child victims because if the child was later deemed unavailable to testify at trial, the deposition testimony could be admitted without cross-examination. Counsel further testified he took J.K.'s deposition, again, to “show Mr. Baker what we [were] up against.” Id. at 34. During the deposition, J.K. stated that Baker had molested her “to [sic] many that [sic] I can remember.” PCR Ex. Vol., Petitioner's Ex. C, p. 24. She further testified the molestations had started as far back as 2005. Id. at 35. In addition, J.K. said that Baker had penetrated her vagina with his penis on at least one occasion between November 5 and December 5, 2008. Id. at 22–23.
On May 12, 2009, the day before his jury trial was scheduled to begin, Baker appeared before the court for a guilty plea hearing, apparently without a written plea agreement from the State. He admitted that he had committed child molesting as a Class A felony in exchange for the State's dismissal of the count of child molesting as a Class C felony. Direct Appeal Tr., Change of Plea Hearing, p. 8. The court accepted Baker's guilty plea and subsequently sentenced him to a forty-year term, with ten of those years to be served on probation. The court further determined that Baker was a sexually violent predator and would be required to register as a sex offender upon release from incarceration.
Next,...
To continue reading
Request your trial