Corina M. Smith v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) ( 2019 )

MEMORANDUM DECISION
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D),
this Memorandum Decision shall not be FILED
regarded as precedent or cited before any Apr 22 2019, 6:18 am
court except for the purpose of establishing CLERK
Indiana Supreme Court
the defense of res judicata, collateral Court of Appeals
and Tax Court
estoppel, or the law of the case.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Brian A. Karle Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
Ball Eggleston, PC Attorney General of Indiana
Lafayette, Indiana
Tyler G. Banks
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Corina M. Smith, April 22, 2019
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
18A-CR-2258
v. Appeal from the
Tippecanoe Superior Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable
Appellee-Plaintiff Steven Meyer, Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
79D02-1707-F5-85
Vaidik, Chief Judge.
Case Summary
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2258 | April 22, 2019 Page 1 of 5
[1] Corina M. Smith appeals her sentence of five years for trafficking with an
inmate, arguing that it is inappropriate in light of the nature of her offense and
her character. We disagree and affirm.
Facts and Procedural History
[2] This case arose from an incident in September 2016 in which Smith was caught
mailing a strip or strips of Buprenorphine, a controlled substance, to her
boyfriend, Kyle Balser, while he was an inmate at the Tippecanoe County Jail.
The State charged her with Level 5 felony trafficking with an inmate, but not
until July 2017. In the interim, Smith committed three additional felonies that
led to three additional prosecutions: Level 4 felony dealing in
methamphetamine in White County in December 2016, see Case No. 91D01-
1701-F2-19; Level 2 felony conspiracy to commit dealing in methamphetamine
in Tippecanoe County in February 2017, see Case No. 79D02-1706-F2-13; and
Level 6 felony theft in Tippecanoe County in March 2017, see Case No. 79D05-
1703-F6-216. Appellant’s App. Vol. II p. 68.
[3] Smith pled guilty and was sentenced in two of those other cases—F6-216 and
F2-19—in 2017. Then, in June 2018, Smith and the State entered into a plea
agreement under which Smith agreed to plead guilty as charged in this case and
to plead guilty to Level 2 felony conspiracy to commit dealing in
methamphetamine and to being a habitual offender in F2-13, with sentencing
left to the discretion of the trial court. In this case, the trial court sentenced
Smith to five years in the Department of Correction. In F2-13, the court
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2258 | April 22, 2019 Page 2 of 5
sentenced Smith to twenty-eight years, to run consecutive to the five years in
this case.
[4] Smith has separately appealed her sentences in this case and in F2-13. In this
memorandum decision, we address Smith’s five-year sentence for trafficking
with an inmate. In another memorandum decision issued today, we affirm
Smith’s twenty-eight-year sentence in F2-13 but remand to the trial court to
reconsider whether Smith’s sentences in these two cases should run
concurrently or consecutively (Judge Altice dissents on the latter issue). See
Corina M. Smith v. State, 18A-CR-2214 (Ind. Ct. App. Apr. 22, 2019).
Discussion and Decision
[5] Smith contends that her five-year sentence for trafficking with an inmate is
inappropriate and asks us to reduce it pursuant to Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B),
which provides that an appellate court “may 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.” “Whether a sentence is inappropriate ultimately
turns on the culpability of the defendant, the severity of the crime, the damage
done to others, and a myriad of other factors that come to light in a given case.”
Thompson v. State, 5 N.E.3d 383, 391 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (citing Cardwell v.
State, 895 N.E.2d 1219, 1224 (Ind. 2008)). Because we generally defer to the
judgment of trial courts in sentencing matters, defendants have the burden of
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2258 | April 22, 2019 Page 3 of 5
persuading us that their sentences are inappropriate. Schaaf v. State, 54 N.E.3d
1041, 1044-45 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016).
[6] The starting point for determining whether a particular sentence is
inappropriate is the advisory sentence set by the legislature. Bowman v. State, 51
N.E.3d 1174, 1181 (Ind. 2016). The sentencing range for a Level 5 felony is
one to six years, with an advisory sentence of three years. Ind. Code § 35-50-2-
6. Here, the trial court imposed an above-advisory term of five years.
[7] Regarding the nature of her offense, Smith asserts that “although
Buprenorphine is a controlled substance, its practical application is for
treatment of opioid addiction.” Appellant’s Br. p. 8. However, she does not
dispute that the drug can also be used recreationally. Still, there does not
appear to have been anything particularly egregious about Smith’s offense as
compared to other instances of trafficking with an inmate.
[8] That said, Smith’s above-advisory sentence is more than justified by her
criminal history, which she fails to discuss beyond noting that it is “non-
violent.” Id. The pre-sentence investigation report, the accuracy of which
Smith does not contest, reveals the following. As a teenager, she was
adjudicated a delinquent and eventually committed to the Indiana Girls’ School
for committing forgery, which would have been a felony if committed by an
adult. In 1998, Smith was convicted of felony auto theft. In 1999, she was
convicted of six counts of misdemeanor check deception. In 2004, she was
convicted of five felonies: maintaining an illegal drug lab, possession of stolen
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2258 | April 22, 2019 Page 4 of 5
property, and three counts of possession of methamphetamine. In 2011 and
2012, Smith had misdemeanor convictions for purchasing precursors and
criminal trespass. Also, as discussed above, Smith committed multiple
additional felonies in the months after she was caught trafficking: Level 4 felony
dealing in methamphetamine (White County, December 2016); Level 2 felony
conspiracy to commit dealing in methamphetamine (Tippecanoe County,
February 2017); and Level 6 felony theft (Tippecanoe County, March 2017).
Given this sustained history of felonies and other criminal conduct, we cannot
say that Smith’s sentence is inappropriate.
[9] Affirmed.
Kirsch, J., and Altice, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2258 | April 22, 2019 Page 5 of 5