Singh v. State

• Decision Date: 20 August 2015
• Docket Number: No. 49A02–1410–CR–00717.,49A02–1410–CR–00717.
• Parties: Pardip SINGH, Appellant–Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee–Plaintiff.
• Court: Indiana Appellate Court

40 N.E.3d 981

Pardip SINGH, Appellant–Defendant

v.STATE of Indiana, Appellee–Plaintiff.

No. 49A02–1410–CR–00717.

Court of Appeals of Indiana.

Aug. 20, 2015.

Dylan A. Vigh, Indianapolis, IN, Attorney for Appellant.

Gregory F. Zoeller, Attorney General of Indiana, Tyler G. Banks, Deputy Attorney General, Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellee.

Opinion

MATHIAS

, Judge.

[1] Following a jury trial, Pardip Singh (“Singh”) was convicted of Class B felony attempted promotion of human trafficking, Class C felony criminal confinement, and Class D felony intimidation. He received an aggregate sentence of fifteen years. Singh appeals and raises the following three issues, which we restate as:

1. Whether sufficient evidence supports Singh's conviction for attempted promotion of human trafficking;

2. Whether Singh's convictions for attempted promotion of human trafficking and criminal confinement are barred on double jeopardy principles; and

3. Whether the trial court abused its sentencing discretion in finding certain aggravating factors.

[2] We affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

[3] Singh and P.K. were paired by a matchmaker and married in March 2006. At the time, P.K. was living in India and studying nursing. For the following six years, Singh lived in the United States and occasionally visited P.K., who was still living in India. In February 2012, P.K. moved to the United States to live with Singh and his parents in New Jersey. She had no other family in the country except for an uncle in California, no job, and spoke little English. At some point while they were living in New Jersey, Singh began to beat P.K. and prohibited her from contacting her family in India.

[4] Singh and P.K. moved to Indiana in May 2012, shortly after Singh began working as a commercial truck driver. On May 7, 2012, Singh's father drove P.K. to Ohio, where they met Singh. For the next four days, Singh and P.K. drove throughout Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York before arriving in Indianapolis. During this time, Singh forced P.K. to remain in the back of the cab of his semi-truck and gave her only cookies and water to eat and drink. When P.K. had to use the restroom, Singh followed her and warned her that he would kill her if she spoke to anyone.

[5] On May 12, 2012, soon after Singh and P.K. reached the apartment Singh and his father had leased in Indianapolis, Singh called P.K.'s father and told him that Singh was going to kill P.K. He also called P.K.'s uncle, who lived in California, and demanded that he be paid the equivalent of roughly $64,000, or he would kill P.K. After beating P.K., Singh made three more phone calls, during which P.K. heard Singh say that he had “a girl from India” and that he would “take $500 for one night for her.” Tr. p. 244. Singh left the apartment shortly thereafter, telling P.K. that he would kill her if she left the apartment.

[6] When Singh returned later, he was accompanied by an unidentified male. P.K., who was in another room, heard Singh say “500” to the man. Tr. p. 246. She refused to come out of the room when Singh called her. Singh dragged her by the hair out of the room and, when she refused to go with the man, began to beat her. The man fled, and Singh continued to beat P.K., eventually pushing her down the stairs of their second-story apartment. She landed at the bottom of the stairs, near the apartment complex's mailboxes. Singh then grabbed her and pounded her head against the metal mailboxes. At some point during the beating, Singh's cell phone rang and he stopped the attack long enough to answer it. P.K. took the opportunity to flee upstairs to the apartment, where she locked Singh out.

[7] Singh called the police from outside the apartment. When Officer Robert Robinson (“Officer Robinson”) of the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department arrived, Singh asked for the officer's help in re-entering his apartment. Officer Robinson knocked on the apartment door and announced his presence. When P.K. opened the door, Officer Robinson observed that she was “visibly upset,” shaking, crying, and had a “red abrasion” on her forehead

. Tr. pp. 210–11. She pleaded for the officer's help, crying “[h]e hurt me. He won't let me go.” Id. After speaking with P.K., Officer Robinson arrested Singh.

[8] On August 17, 2012, the State charged Singh with Class B felony promotion of human trafficking, Class C felony criminal confinement, Class D felony intimidation, Class D felony criminal confinement, Class A misdemeanor domestic battery, and Class A misdemeanor battery. After Singh's counsel filed a notice indicating that Singh was mentally incompetent to stand trial, the trial court appointed two physicians to evaluate Singh's competency. On August 29, 2013, with the consent of both parties, the trial court issued an order committing Singh to the Division of Mental Health and Addiction in order to “provide competency restoration services” for Singh. Appellant's App. pp. 38–39.

[9] On March 6, 2014, the Logansport State Hospital notified the trial court that Singh had been determined to be competent to stand trial. Singh's jury trial was held on August 18, 2014. The jury found Singh guilty of five of the six counts, acquitting him of Class D felony criminal confinement.

[10] A sentencing hearing was held a month later, on September 18, 2014. The trial court vacated Singh's domestic battery and battery convictions on double jeopardy grounds. After hearing evidence from both parties, the trial court found as mitigating that the present offense was Singh's first felony conviction, the possibility that Singh's conduct could be related to a mental health problem, and the fact that Singh “in the future will be able to find a job and be employed.” Tr. pp. 448–49. It found as aggravating that Singh was in a position of trust with respect to his wife since she had no nearby family, no job, was new to the country, spoke little English, and was dependent on Singh; that Singh violated the terms of his pre-trial release; and that Singh had prior arrests for domestic violence and a previous assault conviction.

[11] The trial court concluded that the aggravating factors outweighed the mitigating factors and sentenced Singh to fourteen years for attempted promotion of human trafficking, four years for criminal confinement, and 545 days for intimidation. The court ordered Singh's human trafficking and confinement sentences to be served consecutively, with three years suspended to probation, and the intimidation sentence to be served concurrently to the other sentences, for an aggregate executed sentence of fifteen years.

[12] Singh now appeals.

I. Sufficiency

[13] Singh first argues that the evidence is insufficient to sustain his conviction for attempted promotion of human trafficking. When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence needed to support a criminal conviction, we neither reweigh evidence nor judge witness credibility. Bailey v. State, 907 N.E.2d 1003, 1005 (Ind.2009)

. “We consider only the evidence supporting the judgment and any reasonable inferences that can be drawn from such evidence.” Id. We will affirm if substantial evidence of probative value exists such that a reasonable trier of fact could have concluded the defendant was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Id.

[14] Indiana Code section 35–42–3.5–1(a)

provides that:

A person who, by force, threat of force, or fraud, knowingly or intentionally recruits, harbors, or transports another person:

(1) to engage the other person in:

(A) forced labor; or

(B) involuntary servitude; or

(2) to force the other person into:

(A) marriage;

(B) prostitution; or

(C) participating in sexual conduct (as defined by IC 35–42–4–4

);

commits promotion of human trafficking, a [Class B] felony.

[15] Under the attempt statute, the offense of attempted promotion of human trafficking is complete when, “acting with the culpability required for commission of the crime, [a person] engages in conduct that constitutes a substantial step toward commission of the crime.” I.C. § 35–41–5–1

.

[16] Singh claims that “the evidence is insufficient in showing beyond a reasonable doubt that when Singh transported P.K. in his truck, he did so with the requisite knowledge that he would be forcing P.K. to perform commercial sex acts upon arriving in Indiana.” Appellant's Br. at 7. He claims no evidence exists of a “scheme whereby he intended to force P.K. into commercial sex for any time prior to the May 12, 2012 incident” or that he “engaged in comparable behavior with P.K. prior to May 12, 2012.” Id. at 8.

[17] Singh's argument presumes that, in order to convict him of attempted promotion of human trafficking, the State had to prove that he had the intent to force P.K. into prostitution during the time he was transporting her to Indiana. We note, however, that the statute criminalizes transportation, recruitment or harboring a person in order to force them into marriage, prostitution, or participating in sexual conduct. The State presented evidence that, on May 12, 2012, Singh beat P.K. and told her that he would kill her if she left his apartment. During the time P.K. remained in Singh's apartment under threats against her life, Singh made phone calls soliciting money from other men in exchange for “one night” with P.K., brought one man to the apartment apparently for the purpose of trading sex with P.K. for five hundred dollars, and beat P.K. when she refused to go with the man. This evidence is sufficient to prove that Singh harbored P.K. in his apartment to force her into prostitution or sexual conduct.

[18] Under these facts and circumstances, the State presented sufficient evidence to establish that Singh knowingly or intentionally took a substantial step towards using threats and force to harbor P.K. in an apartment and force her into prostitution or participating in sexual conduct.

II. Double Jeopardy

[19] Singh next argues that his convictions for attempted promotion of human trafficking and criminal confinement violate...