Braden Winters v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) ( 2019 )

MEMORANDUM DECISION
FILED
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), Apr 02 2019, 10:05 am
this Memorandum Decision shall not be CLERK
regarded as precedent or cited before any Indiana Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
and Tax Court
court except for the purpose of establishing
the defense of res judicata, collateral
estoppel, or the law of the case.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Donald E.C. Leicht Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
Kokomo, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana
Marjorie Lawyer-Smith
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Braden Winters, April 2, 2019
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
18A-CR-2463
v. Appeal from the Howard Circuit
Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable Lynn Murray,
Appellee-Plaintiff. Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
34C01-1706-F1-117
Shepard, Senior Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2463 | April 2, 2019 Page 1 of 5
[1] Braden Winters appeals the sixteen-year sentence the trial court imposed after
1
he pleaded guilty to aggravated battery, a Level 3 felony. We affirm.
[2] On the night of May 27, 2017, nineteen-year-old Braden Winters was with
Armando Shields at a self-storage facility in Kokomo, Indiana. They met
Austin Mealer, a friend of Winters. The three men smoked a joint.
[3] Next, they went behind the storage units, where Shields and Winters donned
gloves and robbed Mealer at gunpoint, taking his mobile phone and $200-300 in
cash. Shields shot Mealer in the forehead, and then Winters shot Mealer in the
back of his head as he lay on the ground. After Winters and Shields fled,
Mealer stood up and sought help. He later identified Winters and Shields as the
men who attacked him. Mealer developed frequent headaches and trouble
sleeping as a result of his injuries, and he further stated he felt paranoid and
afraid to leave his home.
[4] An arrest warrant was issued for Winters. On July 14, 2017, while he was still
being sought by police, Winters stated on a social media website he was
“feeling excited,” and further proclaimed, “Why they want me so bad. Make
[sic] me feel special. All eyes on me!” Tr. Vol. III, State’s Ex. 1. The United
States Marshals Service arrested Winters on July 20.
1
Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1.5 (2014).
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2463 | April 2, 2019 Page 2 of 5
[5] The State charged Winters with attempted murder, a Level 1 felony, and
robbery resulting in serious bodily injury, a Level 2 felony. The parties
negotiated a plea agreement. Winters agreed to plead guilty to aggravated
battery, a Level 3 felony, and the State agreed to dismiss the Level 1 and Level
2 felonies. The trial court accepted the agreement and sentenced Winters to
sixteen years, suspending one year to community corrections.
[6] Winter argues his sentence is inappropriate and asks us to reduce it to twelve
years, consisting of six years executed, two years served on in-home detention,
and four years of supervised probation. Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B) authorizes
the Court to revise a sentence “authorized by statute if, after due consideration
of the trial court’s decision, the Court finds that the sentence is inappropriate in
light of the nature of the offense and the character of the offender.” A
defendant bears the burden of persuading this Court that the sentence meets the
inappropriateness standard. Childress v. State, 848 N.E.2d 1073 (Ind. 2006).
Our resolution of whether a sentence is appropriate turns on myriad factors,
including our evaluation of the culpability of the defendant, the severity of the
crime, and the damage done to others. Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219 (Ind.
2008).
[7] At the time Winters shot Mealer, a person who committed a Level 3 felony
could be sentenced to a term of between three and sixteen years, with the
advisory sentence being nine years. Ind. Code § 35-50-2-5 (2014). The trial
court sentenced Winters to the maximum, suspending one year to community
corrections.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2463 | April 2, 2019 Page 3 of 5
[8] The nature of the offense is distressing. Winters, along with Shields, ambushed
and robbed his friend Mealer. They brought gloves with them, which
demonstrates a degree of planning. Shields shot Mealer in the forehead, and
Winters shot him in the back of the head as he lay on the ground. Winters fled
rather than seek help for Mealer. Further, Winters failed to turn himself in,
choosing instead to brag on social media about being “excited” because law
enforcement was looking for him.
[9] Mealer’s near-fatal injuries have left him physically and psychologically scarred.
His doctors had to leave one of the rounds in his head and do not know if his
chronic severe headaches will go away. Mealer’s employment prospects are
further hampered because he is afraid to leave his house.
[10] Turning to the character of the offender, Winters has no adult criminal history,
but he has a steady juvenile record. In 2013, he was adjudicated a delinquent
for an act of criminal mischief, a Class D felony, if committed by an adult.
That same year, Winters was adjudicated a delinquent for acts of battery, a
Class B misdemeanor, and criminal trespass, a Class A misdemeanor, if
committed by an adult. He was placed on probation and later violated the
terms of probation. Finally, in 2015, Winters was adjudicated a delinquent for
acts of theft, resisting law enforcement, and possession of alcohol while
underage, all misdemeanors, if committed by an adult. Winter has been unable
to stay out of trouble for more than a few years at a time, despite ample
opportunities to reform his conduct. In addition, he regularly consumed
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2463 | April 2, 2019 Page 4 of 5
controlled substances including marijuana, heroin, and methamphetamine
despite receiving substance abuse treatment.
[11] Winters claims he is learning disabled, but: (1) he did not present this argument
at sentencing; and (2) he does not identify a link between his learning disability
and the grievous offense he committed. He has failed to demonstrate his
sentence is inappropriate.
[12] For the reasons stated above, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Bailey, J., and Brown, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2463 | April 2, 2019 Page 5 of 5