Randall Ray Kratzer v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) ( 2019 )


Menu:
  • MEMORANDUM DECISION
    Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D),
    this Memorandum Decision shall not be                                       FILED
    regarded as precedent or cited before any
    Dec 31 2019, 6:22 am
    court except for the purpose of establishing
    the defense of res judicata, collateral                                     CLERK
    Indiana Supreme Court
    estoppel, or the law of the case.                                          Court of Appeals
    and Tax Court
    ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT                                  ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
    Steven E. Ripstra                                       Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
    Jasper, Indiana                                         Attorney General of Indiana
    Benjamin J. Shoptaw
    Deputy Attorney General
    Indianapolis, Indiana
    IN THE
    COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
    Randall Ray Kratzer,                                    December 31, 2019
    Appellant-Defendant,                                    Court of Appeals Case No.
    19A-CR-1181
    v.                                              Appeal from the Dubois Circuit
    Court
    State of Indiana,                                       The Honorable Mark R.
    Appellee-Plaintiff.                                     McConnell, Judge
    Trial Court Cause No.
    19C01-1808-F6-901
    19C01-1310-FB-821
    Tavitas, Judge.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1181 | December 31, 2019               Page 1 of 12
    Case Summary
    [1]   Randall Ray Kratzer appeals the trial court’s determination of jail time credit
    following its revocation of Kratzer’s probation and work release placement and
    following his conviction for failure to return to lawful detention, a Level 6
    felony. We affirm.
    Issue
    [2]   Kratzer’s sole issue on appeal is whether the trial court erroneously denied
    Kratzer jail time credit to which he was entitled.
    Facts
    [3]   This appeal stems from Kratzer’s numerous periods of pretrial confinement
    between 2012 and 2019 in several different jurisdictions. In December 2012
    and January 2013, respectively, Kratzer was charged in separate causes with
    driving with a suspended license having a prior conviction within ten years and
    failure to appear on a felony charge in Perry County, Indiana (“the Perry
    County offenses”). In September and November of 2013, Kratzer was charged
    in Vanderburgh County, Indiana with separate counts of theft, Class D felonies
    (“the Vanderburgh County Offenses”).
    [4]   In October 2013, the State charged Kratzer in Cause 19C01-1310-FB-821 (“FB-
    821”) with confining and compelling T. to engage in sexual intercourse in
    Dubois County, Indiana. On May 21, 2014, Kratzer pleaded guilty in Cause
    FB-821 to Count I, criminal confinement, a Class D felony; Count II, sexual
    battery, a Class D felony; and Count III, to being a habitual offender. The plea
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1181 | December 30, 2019   Page 2 of 12
    agreement provided: “In the event [Kratzer] violates any of the terms of
    Community Corrections or Probation, [Kratzer]’s Community Corrections and
    Probation sentences shall be revoked, and he will be remanded to the [DOC]
    for the remainder of his sentence.” Kratzer’s Conf. App. Vol. II p. 90.
    [5]   During the hearing on Kratzer’s guilty plea in Dubois County, counsel for
    Kratzer advised the trial court that Vanderburgh and Perry Counties had holds
    on Kratzer and requested that “he be released to work release” to “allow him . .
    . to take care of these holds and so that when we come back for sentencing, he
    would be ready to go.” Tr. Vol. II p. 12. The trial court replied that it was
    amenable to allowing the other counties to take custody of Kratzer, but that
    “there would be a hold on [Kratzer in Dubois County] so that [Vanderburgh
    and Perry Counties] don’t turn [Kratzer] loose. . . .” 
    Id. at 11.
    [6]   On June 17, 2014, Kratzer was sentenced in Cause FB-821 to: Count I, three
    years in the DOC, comprised of one year in the Dubois County Security
    Center, and two years on community corrections work release; Count II, three
    years on community corrections work release; and Count III, four years
    suspended to probation, including two years on adult day reporting, with the
    sentences to be served consecutively. The trial court awarded Kratzer 166 days
    of jail time credit for time served in Dubois County. 1 The trial court also
    1
    Kratzer received 166 days of jail time credit for time served in Dubois County from November 25, 2013, to
    February 3, 2014, and from March 15, 2014, to June 16, 2014. During the sentencing hearing, Kratzer
    argued that he was entitled to additional jail time credit. At the time, Kratzer had not received jail time
    credit in Vanderburgh or Perry Counties for time spent in jail in either county.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1181 | December 30, 2019               Page 3 of 12
    ordered Kratzer to report to work release within three hours of sentencing that
    same day. Kratzer “absconded.” 2 
    Id. at 237.
    [7]   On September 19, 2014, Kratzer was sentenced, pursuant to a plea agreement,
    to time served for the Vanderburgh County offenses and was awarded 308 days
    of jail time credit. On October 9, 2014, Kratzer pleaded guilty to one of the two
    Perry County offenses in exchange for dismissal of the other charged offense.
    Kratzer was sentenced to time already served. See Exhibits Vol. p. 11.
    [8]   Beginning on approximately December 2, 2015, Kratzer was incarcerated for
    several years on various criminal charges in Daviess County, Kentucky. 3 See
    Tr. Vol. II p. 40; State’s Ex. 4.
    [9]   On June 7, 2016, in Dubois County, Indiana, the State petitioned to revoke
    Kratzer’s work release placement; and the trial court issued bench warrants for
    Kratzer’s arrest. The State subsequently filed an amended petition to revoke his
    probation.
    2
    Kratzer did not return to Dubois County’s custody until April 2018.
    3
    On August 11, 2016, Kratzer was sentenced, pursuant to a plea agreement, to three years in the
    Commonwealth of Kentucky’s Department of Correction for “theft by failure to make required disposition of
    property valued at $500.00 or more.” Exhibits Vol. p. 25. On October 20, 2016, Kratzer was sentenced,
    pursuant to a plea agreement, to one year in the Commonwealth of Kentucky’s Department of Correction for
    “theft by failure to make required disposition of property valued at $500.00 but less than $10,000.00.” 
    Id. at 20,
    21. The Kentucky Court ordered Kratzer’s Kentucky sentences to be served consecutively, for an
    aggregate three-year sentence. Kratzer was in custody in Kentucky from December 2, 2015, until he was
    discharged to “post incarceration supervision” on April 8, 2018, having fully served his Kentucky sentences.
    See 
    id. at 32.
    Kratzer was then transported to Dubois County, Indiana. See 
    id. at 16.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1181 | December 30, 2019                Page 4 of 12
    [10]   On or about April 8, 2018, Kratzer was transported to Dubois County, Indiana,
    from Kentucky; on April 9, 2018, Kratzer appeared before the trial court in the
    custody of the Dubois County Sheriff’s Department “as a result of a warrant.”
    Kratzer’s Conf. App. Vol. II p. 12. On April 10, 2018, the State filed an
    amended petition to revoke Kratzer’s work release placement, and on April 13,
    2018, the State filed a petition to revoke Kratzer’s probation. At a hearing on
    April 16, 2018, Kratzer denied the allegations in the amended petition to revoke
    work release and the petition to revoke Kratzer’s probation.
    [11]   On July 13, 2018, the trial court conducted a hearing on the petition to revoke
    work release and the petition to revoke Kratzer’s probation. On August 10,
    2018, Kratzer was unsuccessfully terminated from work release. The trial court
    placed Kratzer on pretrial release; however, he failed to return as scheduled and
    reportedly absconded from the jurisdiction. On August 13, 2018, the State
    charged Kratzer with failure to return to lawful detention in Dubois County in
    Cause 19C01-1808-F6-901 (“F6-901”). A bench warrant was issued for
    Kratzer’s arrest. On August 14, 2018, the State filed a second petition to revoke
    Kratzer’s work release placement. On August 24, 2018, the State filed its
    second petition to revoke Kratzer’s probation. On or about August 21, 2018,
    law enforcement officials located Kratzer in Illinois and returned him to Dubois
    County custody.
    [12]   On January 7, 2019, the trial court conducted a fact-finding hearing on the
    petitions to revoke work release and probation. At the close of the evidence,
    the trial court found that Kratzer violated the terms of his work release and
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1181 | December 30, 2019   Page 5 of 12
    probation in FB-821 and ordered Kratzer to be held pending disposition in F6-
    901. Kratzer was convicted by a jury in F6-901 on January 23, 2019. On
    March 28, 2019, the trial court ordered him to serve 3,285 days of his
    previously-suspended sentence in FB-821 in the DOC. In FB-821, the trial
    court awarded Kratzer 344 days of jail time credit and an additional 344 days of
    good credit time for his pretrial confinement from April 8, 2018, to August 10,
    2018; and from August 21, 2018, to March 27, 2019. In F6-901, the trial court
    sentenced Kratzer to 547 days in the DOC, with the F6-901 and FB-821
    sentences to be served consecutively. The trial court did not award jail time
    credit in F6-901. Kratzer filed a motion to correct error on April 26, 2019,
    which the trial court denied on April 30, 2019. Kratzer now appeals from the
    trial court’s determination of jail time credit.
    Analysis
    [13]   Kratzer argues that he is entitled to additional jail time credit and good time
    credit applied to the aggregate of his sentences in FB-821 and F6-901, “from the
    time of his original 2013 arrest in Cause 1310-FB-000821, while being held in
    Dubois County, other Indiana jurisdictions, and in Illinois on an Indiana
    warrant.” Kratzer’s Br. pp. 12, 20. The State counters that Kratzer seeks to
    “double dip by receiving credit time for his time [spent incarcerated] from other
    counties and states.” Appellee’s Br. p. 11.
    [14]   Pre-sentence jail time credit is a matter of statutory right, not a matter of
    judicial discretion. Weaver v. State, 
    725 N.E.2d 945
    , 948 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000).
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1181 | December 30, 2019   Page 6 of 12
    Indiana Code Section 35-50-6-3 (2015) provides, regarding good
    time credit for a person convicted of a crime that occurred prior
    to July 1, 2014:[ 4]
    (b) A person assigned to Class I earns one (1) day of good time
    credit for each day the person is imprisoned for a crime or
    confined awaiting trial or sentencing.
    (c) A person assigned to Class II earns one (1) day of good time
    credit for every two (2) days the person is imprisoned for a crime
    or confined awaiting trial or sentencing.
    (d) A person assigned to Class III earns no good time credit.
    (e) A person assigned to Class IV earns one (1) day of good time
    credit for every six (6) days the person is imprisoned for a crime
    or confined awaiting trial or sentencing.
    As our Indiana Supreme Court has noted, when a defendant
    challenges the validity of the pre-sentence credit time he received,
    there are two types of credit that must be calculated: “(1) the
    credit toward the sentence a prisoner receives for time actually
    served, and (2) the additional credit a prisoner receives for good
    behavior and educational attainment.” Purcell v. State, 
    721 N.E.2d 220
    , 222 (Ind. 1999). * * * * *
    To determine whether a prisoner is entitled to pre-trial credit for
    actual time served, we must determine whether the defendant
    was confined before trial and whether that confinement was the
    “result of the criminal charge for which [the] sentence is being
    4
    Kratzer’s FB-821 offense, which is the subject of the jail time credit issue, was committed prior to July 1,
    2014.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1181 | December 30, 2019                   Page 7 of 12
    imposed.” Stephens v. State, 
    735 N.E.2d 278
    , 284 (Ind. Ct. App.
    2000), trans. denied. See Ind. Code § 35-50-6-3 (requiring
    defendant be “confined awaiting trial or sentencing”). Thus, for
    example,
    [i]f a person incarcerated awaiting trial on more than one
    charge is sentenced to concurrent terms for the separate
    crimes, he or she is entitled to receive credit time applied
    against each separate term. However, if the defendant
    receives consecutive terms, he or she is only allowed credit
    time against the total or aggregate of the terms.
    Payne v. State, 
    838 N.E.2d 503
    , 510 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005)), trans.
    denied.
    Once we have determined whether a prisoner was entitled to
    credit for actual time served and, if so, how many days were
    earned, then we may turn to Indiana Code Section 35-50-6-3 to
    determine how many days of good time credit were also earned.
    Good time credit under that statute is a “matter of statutory right,
    not a matter of judicial discretion.” Weaver v. State, 
    725 N.E.2d 945
    , 948 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000). The trial court simply calculates
    how many good time credit days the defendant earned based on
    the number of days of actual time served and the defendant’s
    “Class,” as defined in Indiana Code Section 35-50-6-4.
    Maciaszek v. State, 
    75 N.E.3d 1089
    , 1091-92 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017), trans. denied.
    [15]   Kratzer cites Maciaszek in support of his claim that he is entitled to additional
    jail time credit for time that he served in other jurisdictions while subject to a
    Dubois County hold. While Maciaszek served an unrelated sentence for a
    Florida conviction, Maciaszek was charged with criminal offenses in Indiana,
    and Indiana authorities placed a hold on Maciaszek. At the time, Maciaszek
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1181 | December 30, 2019   Page 8 of 12
    was also under holds for alleged crimes committed in New Hampshire and
    Maine. Upon completion of his Florida sentence, Maciaszek was transported
    to New Hampshire, where he was convicted and sentenced for crimes
    committed there. During his incarceration in New Hampshire, Maciaszek
    sought disposition of his Indiana charges and, at his request, was transported to
    Indiana, where he pleaded guilty and was sentenced “with no credit for time
    served prior to sentencing.” 
    Maciaszek, 75 N.E.3d at 1091
    . Maciaszek was
    returned to New Hampshire, subject to an order to be transported back to
    Indiana after he served his New Hampshire sentence.
    [16]   Maciaszek subsequently petitioned unsuccessfully for additional jail time credit
    in Indiana for the period between the enactment of Indiana’s hold and the
    imposition of his Indiana sentence. On appeal, we affirmed the trial court’s
    denial of additional jail time credit as to Maciaszek’s “request for presentence
    credit for actual time served or good time credit based on the time he spent
    incarcerated in Florida and New Hampshire prior to his extradition to
    Indiana[.]” 
    Id. at 1095.
    As we reasoned:
    Although IC 35-50-6-3 states a defendant is allowed credit for
    time “confined awaiting trial or sentencing,” we conclude the
    Legislature clearly intended the credit to apply only to the
    sentence for the offense for which the presentence time was
    served. Any other result would allow credit time for time served
    on wholly unrelated offenses. Under the criminal justice system,
    once convicted, the defendant must serve the sentence imposed
    for the offense committed. Credit time allowed by legislative grace
    toward a specific sentence clearly must be for time served for the offense for
    which that specific sentence was imposed.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1181 | December 30, 2019   Page 9 of 12
    
    Id. at 1093.
    Thus, we found that because Maciaszek’s Indiana charges were
    unrelated to his Florida and New Hampshire convictions, the trial court did not
    err when it refused to award Indiana credit time to Maciaszek for the time he
    served in Florida and New Hampshire on unrelated charges.
    [17]   The instant case, like Maciaszek, is muddled by Kratzer’s multiple periods of
    incarceration in different jurisdictions during the relevant period. As the trial
    court observed in its amended sentencing order, “[Kratzer] has been
    incarcerated elsewhere nearly all, if not all, of the time that has elapsed since he
    was released from the Dubois County Security Center [on June 17, 2014] to
    begin work release” and failed to return. Kratzer’s Conf. App. Vol. II p. 160.
    Consistently with the relevant holding in Maciaszek, the trial court told Kratzer
    at the sentencing hearing in FB-821 and F6-901: “You only get credit for time
    that you served on this cause, or this jail”; “if you went somewhere to answer to
    another charge, if you ended up serving time on that, you get credit [ ] toward[ ]
    that cause, but you wouldn’t get credit here”; “[i]f you had a hold it would have
    been out of another county[;] [a]ny time that you serve[d] as a result of that
    [other county’s hold] would be applied towards that other county, not this
    county[.]” 
    Id. at 244-46.
    [18]   The record on appeal is extremely convoluted and spans multiple periods of
    pretrial confinement in different jurisdictions. See Kratzer’s Br. p. 15 (“It is
    evident that the two separate cases, extending over a six-year period (2013 to
    2019), involving eight different jurisdictions, contributes to the difficulty in
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1181 | December 30, 2019   Page 10 of 12
    precisely calculating credit time.”) (footnote omitted). As Kratzer argues in his
    brief:
    . . .[T]he Record in this Case is in many instances, and perhaps
    charitably characterized, as muddled. A few examples out of
    several are that: . . . there is no evidence in the Record to
    precisely identify [the] time [that Kratzer spent incarcerated in
    Spencer County]; Vanderburgh County and Dubois Count[ies]’
    Work Release sentences seem to overlap; and Kratzer was
    arrested on December 24, 2014, November 10, 2015, and August
    11, 2016, in unspecified Courts on charges with unspecified
    results . . . .
    
    Id. at 19.
    [19]   That said, the record before us reveals the following: during the relevant period,
    Kratzer was subject to Indiana criminal charges in Perry, Spencer, and
    Vanderburgh Counties and criminal charges in Kentucky; and Kratzer was
    subject to holds in Vanderburgh County and Kentucky. The record further
    reveals that the majority of Kratzer’s pretrial confinement pertained to offenses
    in other jurisdictions. Specifically, during the relevant period, Kratzer: (1)
    received 308 days of jail time credit regarding the Vanderburgh County
    offenses; (2) received a “time served” sentence regarding the Perry County
    offenses; and (3) fully served an aggregate three-year sentence for Kentucky
    convictions from December 2015 through April 2018, at which time he was
    returned to Dubois County custody.
    [20]   In determining Kratzer’s eligibility for jail time credit from such a convoluted
    incarceration record, the trial court correctly declined to award jail time credit
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1181 | December 30, 2019   Page 11 of 12
    to Kratzer for time that Kratzer clearly served in other jurisdictions on
    unrelated charges. See 
    Maciaszek, 75 N.E.3d at 1093
    (“Credit time allowed by
    legislative grace toward a specific sentence must be for time served for the
    offense for which that specific sentence was imposed.”). Kratzer was, therefore,
    not entitled to jail time credit in the Dubois County cases based on his pretrial
    confinement in Vanderburgh and Perry Counties or in Kentucky. The record
    conclusively establishes that, after Kratzer was returned to Dubois County’s
    custody in April 2018, Kratzer served periods of pretrial confinement in the
    Dubois County Security Center from April 8, 2018, to August 10, 2018; and
    from August 21, 2018, to March 28, 2019. Accordingly, the trial court properly
    granted Kratzer his jail time credit in Dubois County in FB-821. The trial court
    did not deny Kratzer jail time credit to which he was entitled.
    Conclusion
    [21]   The trial court did not deny Kratzer jail time credit to which he was entitled.
    We affirm.
    [22]   Affirmed.
    Brown, J., and Altice, J., concur.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-1181 | December 30, 2019   Page 12 of 12
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 19A-CR-1181

Filed Date: 12/31/2019

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 12/31/2019