Wilson v. State
| Decision Date | 03 April 2003 |
| Docket Number | No. 82A01-0209-PC-368.,82A01-0209-PC-368. |
| Citation | 785 N.E.2d 1152 |
| Parties | Joshua WILSON, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff. |
| Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
Joshua Wilson, Carlisle, IN, Pro Se Appellant. Steve Carter, Attorney General of Indiana, Andrew A. Kobe, Deputy Attorney General, Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellee.
Joshua Wilson appeals the trial court's denial of his request for six months credit time for earning his GED diploma while incarcerated. Although the evidence before the trial court at the time that it denied Wilson's request shows that he met the three statutory requirements, the court denied the request before the State had an opportunity to file an answer. We therefore remand this case to the trial court with instructions to give the State additional time to respond.
On May 21, 1997, Wilson pled guilty to burglary as a Class B felony and theft as a Class D felony. The trial court sentenced him to an aggregate term of twelve years and ordered that term to be served consecutive to a sentence in another case. While incarcerated, Wilson earned his general educational development (GED) diploma in June 2002. On July 22, 2002, Wilson filed a Motion for Education Credit Time seeking six months credit toward his sentence. One week later, the trial court simply denied the motion without a response from the State, hearing, or order explaining its reasons. This appeal ensued.
cert. denied, 535 U.S. 1019,122 S.Ct. 1610, 152 L.Ed.2d 624 (2002). Rather, they create a narrow remedy for subsequent collateral challenges to convictions that must be based on grounds enumerated in the post-conviction rules. Id. Petitioners must establish their grounds for relief by a preponderance of the evidence. Ind. Post-Conviction Rule 1(5). A petitioner who has been denied post-conviction relief appeals from a negative judgment. Wrinkles, 749 N.E.2d at 1187. Therefore, the petitioner must convince the court on review that the evidence as a whole leads unerringly and unmistakably to a decision opposite that reached by the post-conviction court. Id. at 1187-88. "In other words, the defendant must convince this Court that there is no way within the law that the court below could have reached the decision it did." Stevens v. State, 770 N.E.2d 739, 745 (Ind.2002).
Wilson argues that he is entitled to education credit time under Indiana Code § 35-50-6-3.3. Pursuant to that section:
Ind.Code § 35-50-6-3.3(a), (d). In support of his request for six months of education credit time, Wilson alleged the following in his petition:
Appellant's App. p. 6. On appeal, the State argues that the trial court properly refused to grant Wilson education credit time because he has not demonstrated a "pattern consistent with rehabilitation" as required by statute.1 In Tumbleson v. State, 706 N.E.2d 217 (Ind.Ct.App.1999), the State made the same argument. In addressing this argument, this Court stated:
We acknowledge that there is a subjective component involved in the granting of educational credit, i.e. a pattern of behavior consistent with rehabilitation, and merely completing the requirements for a degree ... does not automatically entitle a defendant to the credit. There is no evidence in the record before us that Tumbleson has not demonstrated a pattern of behavior consistent with rehabilitation while incarcerated, and the trial court did not so find.
Id. at 219. Based on that and the fact that the trial court itself apparently believed that Tumbleson was entitled to the credit, the court of appeals concluded that the trial court erred in failing to grant Tumbleson six months credit for earning his GED diploma while incarcerated. Id.
Two years later, this Court decided Diaz, in which it distinguished Tumbleson. In Diaz, the defendant filed a petition for post-conviction relief seeking credit time for earning his GED diploma and attending a substance abuse class while incarcerated. The post-conviction court summarily denied the defendant's petition without a hearing, and the defendant appealed. On appeal, the issue was whether the defendant had demonstrated a "pattern consistent with rehabilitation." In addressing this issue, this Court held that "demonstrating a `pattern consistent with rehabilitation' pursuant to Ind.Code § 35-50-6-3.3 means, at the least, that the inmate's record must remain free of disciplinary convictions while the inmate is participating in an educational or substance abuse program." 753 N.E.2d at 729. Because the evidence before the post-conviction court showed that the defendant had been convicted of attempted battery while he was pursuing his GED diploma and attending the substance abuse program, the court concluded that the defendant had failed to show a "pattern consistent with rehabilitation." Id. at 729-30. The court distinguished this case from Tumbleson in part because there was evidence that the defendant had not demonstrated a pattern of behavior consistent with rehabilitation by virtue of his conviction. Id. at 729 n....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Saunders v. State
...convince this court that there is no way within the law that the court below could have reached the decision it did. Wilson v. State, 785 N.E.2d 1152, 1153 (Ind.Ct.App.2003) (quoting Stevens, 770 N.E.2d at Saunders claims that, because his conviction for two counts of dealing in cocaine aro......
-
Reives v. State Of Ind.
...credit time. This court has held that such a motion should be treated as a petition for post-conviction relief. See Wilson v. State, 785 N.E.2d 1152 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003). "Post-conviction procedures do not afford a petitioner with a 'super-appeal.'" Williams v. State, 808 N.E.2d 652, 659 (I......
-
Wilson v. State
...trial court simply denied the motion without a response from the State, hearing, or order explaining its reasons. Wilson v. State, 785 N.E.2d 1152, 1153 (Ind.Ct.App.2003). On appeal from that denial, the State claimed the trial court had not erred because Wilson had not demonstrated "a patt......
-
Gipson v. State
...the case resolved by affidavit, and no affidavits were filed. Gipson has presented a prima facie case of error. See Wilson v. State, 785 N.E.2d 1152, 1155 (Ind.Ct.App.2003) (remanding for further proceedings on Wilson's petition for educational credit time where Wilson alleged that he had m......