FILED
Sep 29 2017, 10:49 am
CLERK
Indiana Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
and Tax Court
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Jerry T. Drook Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
Marion, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana
Matthew B. Mackenzie
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Deangelo Evans, September 29, 2017
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
27A02-1704-CR-826
v. Appeal from the Grant Superior
Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable Dana J.
Appellee-Plaintiff Kenworthy, Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
27D02-1602-F4-8
Pyle, Judge.
Statement of the Case
Deangelo Evans (“Evans”) appeals the sentence imposed after he pled guilty to
three counts of Level 4 felony operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 27A02-1704-CR-826 | September 29, 2017 Page 1 of 10
causing death,1 one count of Level 6 felony operating a vehicle while
intoxicated causing serious bodily injury,2 and one count of Level 6 felony
criminal recklessness.3, 4 He specifically contends that his thirty-eight and one-
half (38½) year aggregate sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature of the
offenses and his character. Because we conclude that Evans’ sentence is not
inappropriate, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
[1] We affirm.
Issue
The sole issue for our review is whether Evans’ sentence is
inappropriate.
Facts
[2] At approximately 5:00 a.m. on February 21, 2016, seven Manchester University
students were returning from a visit with friends at Ball State University when
the front driver’s side tire blew out on their van while they were in the far-left
northbound lane of I-69 in Grant County. The driver safely maneuvered the
van to the left shoulder of the interstate and turned on the van’s hazard lights.
1
IND. CODE § 9-30-5-5.
2
I.C. § 9-30-5-4.
3
IND. CODE § 35-42-2-2.
4
Evans also pled guilty to three counts of Level 5 reckless homicide. See I.C. § 35-42-1-5. However, the trial
court merged the reckless homicide counts with the operating a vehicle while intoxicated causing death
counts.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 27A02-1704-CR-826 | September 29, 2017 Page 2 of 10
The students then exited the van to stand in the median where they thought
they would be safe while a few of them attempted to change the tire. The
students included Kirubel Hailu (“Hailu”), Brook Dagnew (“Dagnew”), Nerad
Mangai (“Mangai”), and Israel Timire (“Timire”), who were all exchange
students from Africa.
[3] About 30 minutes later, other drivers observed Evans driving erratically in the
northbound lane of I-69 in Delaware and Grant Counties. He nearly struck two
vehicles as he straddled the rumble strips, accelerated rapidly, passed vehicles
while driving 70-85 miles per hour, and was “back and forth all over the road.”
(Tr. 46). Shortly after two motorists called 911 to report Evans’ dangerous
driving, Evans careened off the interstate and into the median at 70 miles per
hour, striking and killing Hailu, Dagnew, and Mangai. The collision was so
violent that Hailu’s left arm was severed. Dagnew was nearly torn apart at the
waist and his intestines spilled out of his open gut. Several of the victims were
also in a state of undress as a result of the impact. Timire was seriously injured
in the collision.
[4] Although Evans’ van suffered extensive damage, Evans was initially unaware
of the accident and did not stop his vehicle until further down the interstate
when he felt wind blowing through his broken windshield. When police
officers interviewed Evans later that afternoon, he admitted that before the
accident he had been at a party in Indianapolis and had consumed alcohol,
smoked marijuana, and taken alprazolam. He did not remember that he had
driven into the median of the interstate and denied seeing hazard lights on the
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 27A02-1704-CR-826 | September 29, 2017 Page 3 of 10
students’ disabled van. He also claimed that he did not understand why the
victims’ van was on the left side of the road and attempted to shift blame
toward the victims instead of himself. Lab tests showed that Evans’ blood
alcohol content was 0.119.
[5] The State charged Evans with three counts of Level 4 felony operating a motor
vehicle while intoxicated causing death, three counts of Level 5 felony reckless
homicide, one count of Level 6 felony operating a vehicle while intoxicated
causing serious bodily injury, and one count of Level 6 felony criminal
recklessness. Evans pled guilty to all counts.
[6] At the sentencing hearing, the evidence revealed that twenty-seven-year-old
Evans had an extensive criminal history that included felony convictions in
Illinois for possession of methamphetamine, possession of a controlled
substance, aggravated or unlawful use of a weapon or vehicle, possession of a
schedule I or II narcotic, and street gang contact while on parole. Evans also
had probation and parole violations. At the time Evans committed the offenses
in this case, he was violating the conditions of his Illinois parole by being
present in Indiana without permission. In addition, Evans, who had never been
employed, “broke into cars, stole, and gambled” for money. (App. Vol. 3 at
12). He had sold marijuana in the past but explained that he did not make
much money because he was “smoking all of the time.” (App. Vol. 3 at 12).
According to Evans, he stayed high all day long; however, “if [his] parole
officer told him he was going to ‘drop him’ on a urine screen then he would
stop using.” (App. Vol. 3 at 12).
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 27A02-1704-CR-826 | September 29, 2017 Page 4 of 10
[7] At the end of the sentencing hearing, the trial court summarized the evidence as
it related to Evans’ character and the circumstances and the nature of the
offenses as follows:
[Evans’] statements in his presentence investigation interview
indicated that he’s relied upon his family members and girlfriends
to financially support him, that he has broken into cars, stolen
and gambled for money. . . . [Evans] is 27 years of age and has
never held legitimate employment. . . . [Evans] describes a
current lifestyle of staying high all day long; however if his parole
officer told him that he was going to drop him or give him a
urine drug screen, [Evans] would stop using so he could pass that
screen. . . . These statements indicate that [Evans] is able to
control his use in a calculated effort to evade parole
consequences. [Evans] was on parole in Illinois but living in
Indiana. Again he was not supposed to even be here at the time
of these crimes. . . . In sum, [Evans’] character and attitudes
indicated that he has little interest in following the rules of
community supervision and little motivation to take affirmative
steps to improve his lifestyle. This pattern has been consistent
from [Evans’] teenage years through the age of 27 years.
Probation, parole, and short-term incarceration have all failed to
motivate him to engage in law-abiding behavior. [Evans] poses a
high risk of committing further criminal offenses if not
incarcerated. . . . The Court also considers the circumstances of
the crime particularly those circumstances that exceed the
elements necessary to find him guilty of the crimes charged.
First, he had a blood alcohol content of .119 and was also
positive for marijuana and Alprazolam at the time of the crash.
He chose to consume all of those substances in the hours before
the crime at a time when he was on both parole and bond. He
states he felt fine to drive, yet the defendant was observed prior to
the crash driving in an erratic manner, at a high rate of speed,
nearly sideswiping another vehicle and nearly rear-ending a semi
prior to this crash. . . . The victims were on the side of the road
due to a flat tire with their vehicle flashers on. The victims were
standing outside their van in the median because they thought it
would be safer than remaining inside it. [Evans] did not brake or
attempt to avoid striking the victims with his vehicle. Instead, he
struck them at a high rate of speed at least 70 miles per hour.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 27A02-1704-CR-826 | September 29, 2017 Page 5 of 10
The sheer velocity of [Evans’] vehicle threw the victims
significant distance, dismembered one of them, and disrobed
another. Following the crash [Evans] continued to drive and
reported stopping farther down the road after he felt the wind
from the broken window. When interviewing by, by police
immediately after the crash, [Evans] denied driving into the
median, denied that the victims’ vehicle had its flashers activated,
repeatedly claimed he was not intoxicated, and shifted blame
from himself to the victims because they were on the left side of
the road instead of the right. . . . In fashioning an appropriate
sentence, the Court also considers the impact of [Evans’] crimes
on the victims and their families, and here, I cannot vocalize the
magnitude of that impact. Three young international
Manchester, Manchester University students died as a result of
[Evans’] crimes. All were here from their native Africa in pursuit
of a high quality education. All were excellent students, one
even getting straight A+’s at college. [Hailu] was 19 years old,
studying with a goal to become an innovative medical doctor
who would build medical equipment to save lives and protect
humanity. [Hailu] was his parents’ bonus baby. [Dagnew] was
19 years old. He was studying to become a cardiac surgeon.
[Dagnew’s] parents emptied their savings account to send him
here to the United States to get a good education. [Mangai] was
studying to become a neurosurgeon with a goal of establishing
hospitals in the poorer African countries. She, too, was going to
give back. The families of the deceased victims had to travel
from Africa to collect the bodies of their children at great
emotional and financial expense. The funeral costs to [Mangai’s]
family alone was $30,000. The families express that [Evans] has
sentenced them to a life of grief and loss. One described it as hell
on earth. [Mangai’s] father suffers from physical symptoms as a
result of his grief. The families of the deceased urged the Court
to give [Evans] the maximum sentence under the law.
(Tr. 86-92).
[8] The trial court then sentenced Evans to eleven and one-half (11½) years for
each Level 4 operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated causing death
conviction and two (2) years each for the Level 6 felony operating a vehicle
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 27A02-1704-CR-826 | September 29, 2017 Page 6 of 10
while intoxicated causing serious bodily injury and criminal recklessness
convictions. The trial court ordered all of the sentences to run consecutively to
each other for a total executed sentence of thirty-eight and one-half (38½) years.
Evans now appeals his sentence.
Decision
[9] Evans’ sole argument is that his thirty-eight and one-half-year aggregate
sentence is inappropriate. Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B) provides that we may
revise a sentence authorized by statute if, after due consideration of the trial
court’s decision, we find that the sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature
of the offense and the character of the offender. The defendant bears the
burden of persuading this Court that his sentence is inappropriate. Childress v.
State, 848 N.E.2d 1073, 1080 (Ind. 2006). Whether we regard a sentence as
inappropriate turns on the “culpability of the defendant, the severity of the
crime, the damage done to others, and myriad other factors that come to light
in a given case.” Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219, 1224 (Ind. 2008).
[10] The Indiana Supreme Court has further explained that “[s]entencing is
principally a discretionary function in which the trial court’s judgment should
receive considerable deference.” Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219, 1222 (Ind.
2008). “Such deference should prevail unless overcome by compelling evidence
portraying in a positive light the nature of the offense (such as accompanied by
restraint, regard, and lack of brutality) and the defendant’s character (such as
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 27A02-1704-CR-826 | September 29, 2017 Page 7 of 10
substantial virtuous traits or persistent examples of good character).” Stephenson
v. State, 29 N.E.3d 111, 122 (Ind. 2015).
[11] When determining whether a sentence is inappropriate, we acknowledge that
the advisory sentence is the starting point the Legislature has selected as an
appropriate sentence for the crime committed. Childress, 848 N.E.2d at 1081.
Here, Evans was convicted of three Level 4 felonies and two Level 6 felonies.
The sentencing range for a Level 4 felony is between two and twelve years, with
an advisory sentence of six years. See I.C. § 35-50-2-5.5. The sentencing range
for a Level 6 felony is between six months and two and one-half years, with an
advisory sentence of one year. I.C. § 35-50-2-7.
[12] Here, the trial court sentenced Evans to eleven and one-half years for each of
his Level 4 convictions and two years for each of his Level 6 felony convictions.
The trial court ordered all of the sentences to run consecutively to each other for
a total executed sentence of thirty-eight and one-half years. The maximum
sentence would have been forty-one years.
[13] With regard to the nature of the offenses, we note that Evans consumed
alcohol, smoked marijuana, and ingested alprazolam before carelessly getting
behind the wheel of a car to drive. Then, while driving with a blood alcohol
content that was over the legal limit, Evans careened off the interstate and
struck four stranded college students. Three of the students were dismembered,
disrobed, and killed by the impact of the violent collision. Another student was
seriously injured. Further, as the State correctly points out, “hours after the
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 27A02-1704-CR-826 | September 29, 2017 Page 8 of 10
collision[,] when [Evans] was able to be interviewed by law enforcement
officers, he had the audacity to shift responsibility for the accident from his own
extraordinarily reckless actions to the victims, claiming they should not have
stopped the van where they did and that he would have seen them if they had
properly had the vehicle hazard lights on – which they in fact did.” (State’s Br.
11).
[14] With regard to the nature of Evans’ character, we note that he has never been
legitimately employed and uses drugs daily. He is able to control his use in a
calculated effort to avoid criminal consequences. Additionally, Evans has a
criminal history that includes multiple felony convictions in Illinois, as well as
probation and parole violations. At the time Evans committed the offenses in
this case, he was violating his Illinois parole by being in Indiana without
permission. Evans’ former contacts with the law have not caused him to reform
himself. See Jenkins v. State, 909 N.E.2d 1080, 1086 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009), trans.
denied.
[15] Evans has failed to meet his burden to persuade this Court that his thirty-eight
and one-half-year aggregate sentence for his convictions for three counts of
Level 4 felony operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated causing death, one
count of Level 6 felony operating a vehicle while intoxicated causing serious
bodily injury, and one count of Level 6 felony criminal recklessness is
inappropriate.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 27A02-1704-CR-826 | September 29, 2017 Page 9 of 10
[16] Affirmed.
Riley, J., and Robb, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 27A02-1704-CR-826 | September 29, 2017 Page 10 of 10
Deangelo Evans v. State of Indiana
Combined Opinion