Guenther v. State
| Decision Date | 24 December 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 90S04-8612-CR-1049,90S04-8612-CR-1049 |
| Citation | 501 N.E.2d 1071 |
| Parties | Mitchel K. GUENTHER, Appellant (Defendant below), v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee (Plaintiff below). |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
This cause comes to us on a Petition to Transfer from the Fourth District Court of Appeals, brought by Appellee State of Indiana. Appellant was convicted of child molesting, a class C felony, and the presumptive five (5) year sentence was enhanced to eight years.
Appellant Michael K. Guenther appealed his jury conviction, raising five issues for review by the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals, 495 N.E.2d 788, affirmed the trial court on all issues except sentencing, Issue V in the Court of Appeals opinion, in which it found the trial court considered certain factors which are not proper aggravating circumstances, and remanded the cause to the trial court for resentencing. The Court of Appeals erred in this regard and we accordingly vacate its opinion on this Issue and affirm it in all other regards.
The trial court is vested with wide discretion to determine whether a presumptive sentence should be enhanced because of aggravating factors. Shippen v. State (1985), Ind., 477 N.E.2d 903, 905. Only one valid aggravating factor need be shown to sustain the enhancement of a presumptive sentence. Rowley v. State (1979), 271 Ind. 584, 587, 394 N.E.2d 928-931. Statutory factors that may be considered as aggravating circumstances serve as guidelines, but do not limit the matters which the judge may consider when determining what sentence should be imposed. Thurston v. State (1985), Ind., 472 N.E.2d 198, 203.
The trial court here listed the following aggravating factors:
"1. The person has a history of criminal actifity [sic] which includes two counts of check deception, disorderly conduct and a driving while intoxicated plus minor traffic offenses.
2. The person is in need of correctional or rehabilitative treatment that can best be provided by his commitment to a penal facility, inasmuch as he has admitted other sexual misconduct, i.e. vaginal examinations on several occasions of another stepdaughter, inasmuch as the Defendant continues to deny the allegations herein and shows absolutely no remorse for his sexual intercourse with the victim herein or his past conduct regarding the vaginal examination of another stepdaughter and inasmuch as the Court feels that this offense is likely to reoccur [sic].
3. Imposition of a reduced sentence or suspension of the sentence and imposition of probation would depreciate the seriousness of the crime, inasmuch as the Defendant has had sexual intercourse with his stepdaughter which the Court finds to be a heinous crime and in this particular case circumstances are clearly aggravated in light of the numerous vaginal examinations performed on another stepdaughter."
Appellant's fifteen (15) year-old stepdaughter, T.S., testified that Appellant forced her to have sexual intercourse with him. Although Appellant denied this, he did admit to other sexual misconduct, including vaginal examinations of a younger stepdaughter J.C. The Court of Appeals found the trial court supported its enhancement with improper aggravating circumstances: that Appellant showed no remorse for his acts; and that the crime was a heinous one since the victim was his stepdaughter. The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Wesley
...Mahla v. State, 496 N.E.2d 568, 575 (Ind, 1986); Guenther v. State, 495 N.E.2d 788 (Ind, 1986), aff'd in part and vacated in part 501 N.E.2d 1071 (Ind, 1986).2 M.C.L. Sec. 771.14; M.S.A. Sec. 28.1144 provides in relevant part:"Before sentencing any person charged with a felony, and, if dire......
-
Stanger v. State
...that the court's comments indicate as Stanger characterizes them, a finding of lack of remorse, we note that as in Guenther v. State (1986), Ind., 501 N.E.2d 1071, in which lack of remorse was considered an appropriate factor in aggravation, the record contains evidence that Stanger at one ......
-
Tumulty v. State, 48A02-9409-CR-539
...unless no reasonable person could find the challenged sentence appropriate to the particular offense and offender. Guenther v. State (1986), Ind., 501 N.E.2d 1071, 1073; Ind.Appellate Rule 17(B)(2). In light of the aggravating circumstances considered by the trial court, including Tumulty's......
-
Duffitt v. State
...serve as guidelines for the trial court, the court is not limited to those considerations in imposing a sentence. Guenther v. State (1986), Ind., 501 N.E.2d 1071. Here, the trial court listed one statutory consideration, that the imposition of a lesser sentence would depreciate the seriousn......