MEMORANDUM DECISION
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), FILED
this Memorandum Decision shall not be
Nov 29 2017, 10:05 am
regarded as precedent or cited before any
court except for the purpose of establishing CLERK
Indiana Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
the defense of res judicata, collateral and Tax Court
estoppel, or the law of the case.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Leanna Weissmann Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
Lawrenceburg, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana
J.T. Whitehead
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Shannon Fledderman, November 29, 2017
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
15A01-1704-CR-850
v. Appeal from the Dearborn
Superior Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable Jonathan N.
Appellee-Plaintiff Cleary, Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
15D01-1605-F4-16
Baker, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 15A01-1704-CR-850 | November 29, 2017 Page 1 of 8
[1] Shannon Fledderman appeals the sentence imposed by the trial court after
Fledderman pleaded guilty to Level 4 Felony Burglary. Fledderman argues that
the trial court erred by finding an improper aggravating factor and that her
sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and her character.
Finding no error and that the sentence is not inappropriate, we affirm.
Facts
[2] Around 2 p.m. on January 14, 2016, sixty-two-year-old Mary Scudder arrived
at her home in Dearborn County and saw an unfamiliar vehicle in her
driveway. She entered her home and found a strange woman walking down the
stairs wearing latex gloves. The woman identified herself as Shannon Adams
and said that she thought she had entered the home of her friend Kristy. After
the woman, later identified as Fledderman, left, Scudder noticed that $410 in
cash was missing. Scudder’s son posted about the incident on Facebook.
[3] At the time, Indiana State Police Detective Christopher Howell was assisting
the Decatur County Sheriff’s Department on a case of residential entry in which
Fledderman was a suspect. Detective Howell received Scudder’s son’s
Facebook post; the details he described in his post matched the details of the
residential entry case in Decatur County. Detective Howell went to the Ripley
County Jail to interview Fledderman, who was being held on an unrelated
matter. During the interview, Fledderman said that she remembered being in
Scudder’s house, talking to a woman at the bottom of the stairs, and looking
through drawers upstairs.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 15A01-1704-CR-850 | November 29, 2017 Page 2 of 8
[4] On May 2, 2016, the State charged Fledderman with Level 4 felony burglary
and Class A misdemeanor theft. On September 19, 2016, a guilty plea hearing
took place during which Fledderman, pursuant to a signed plea agreement,
agreed to plead guilty to the charges in exchange for the State agreeing to
furlough her for four months into the Cross Roads Christian Recovery Center, a
drug rehabilitation program. The trial court accepted the plea agreement and
ordered Fledderman to return for sentencing upon her release from Cross
Roads. The trial court advised Fledderman that if she left the program before
completion or failed to return for sentencing, she would face an escape charge.
The trial court further advised Fledderman that if she did not follow the
program’s rules, she would be reported, the furlough vacated, and her bail
reinstated.
[5] Fledderman completed the Cross Roads program, and her sentencing hearing
took place on March 6, 2017. During the hearing, Detective Howell testified
about the charges against Fledderman pending in Ripley County, which
included charges for residential burglary, theft, receiving stolen property, and
conspiracy to commit burglary; she also had a pending charge for residential
entry in Decatur County. Detective Howell testified that the break-ins for
which Fledderman was charged were related to opioids. Regarding the cases of
residential burglary in Ripley County, Detective Howell testified that he
believed that Fledderman had been in contact with Krista Comer, who worked
at a local hospital; that Comer had used her position as a hospital employee to
obtain addresses of people recently released from the hospital with prescriptions
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 15A01-1704-CR-850 | November 29, 2017 Page 3 of 8
for opioid drugs; and that Fledderman had targeted the homes of those people
to obtain drugs. The detective testified that the break-ins in Ripley County took
place around the same time as the break-in of Scudder’s house in Dearborn
County.
[6] Fledderman testified that, at the time of the break-ins, she “was just so messed
up” and that if she “didn’t have the pills . . . [she] couldn’t function.” Tr. p. 41.
Fledderman also testified that she had offered to make statements for the
charges pending in each county. Fledderman’s presentence investigation report
indicated that Fledderman was at high risk to re-offend because of substance
abuse. After merging the misdemeanor theft into the felony burglary, the trial
court imposed an eight-year sentence, with seven years executed and one year
suspended to probation, with credit for 240 days served. Fledderman now
appeals.
Discussion and Decision
I. Aggravating Factor
[7] Fledderman first argues that the trial court found an improper aggravating
factor. One of the ways in which a trial court can err in the sentencing process
is by finding aggravators or mitigators that are unsupported by the record or
improper as a matter of law. E.g., Laster v. State, 956 N.E.2d 187, 193 (Ind. Ct.
App. 2011).
[8] At the time of her sentencing hearing for her crime in Dearborn County,
Fledderman had charges pending in Ripley County that alleged that she and
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 15A01-1704-CR-850 | November 29, 2017 Page 4 of 8
another individual used confidential hospital records to find homes to target for
break-ins in order to obtain drugs. The trial court found these other pending
charges to be an aggravating factor, explaining its reasoning as follows:
As far as the facts, the most staggering facts that were presented
today, which I know I've never heard before and I’ll never forget,
um, detective Howells [sic] good work, that this is, and there’s no
evidence to the contrary, that Krista Comer, a Margaret Mary
Hospital employee, was targeting Margaret Mary Hospital
patients because they knew there would be drugs in the home.
It’s some of the most disturbing facts I’ve heard in fifteen years in
a criminal courtroom. Just the thought of patients having their,
their rights violated to that extent is nauseating. The Court finds
that the facts in this case are heinous, the culpability is high,
wearing gloves into the home, going off a script of known
Margaret Mary Hospital patients. The severity of this crime is
high, and the damage done to Miss Scudder and the others is
high.
Tr. p. 58. Fledderman argues that this aggravator was inappropriate because
the “facts that the judge found so heinous, nauseating and disturbing did not
occur here.” Appellant’s Br. p. 12. In other words, Fledderman argues that the
trial court relied on facts outside the record.
[9] Fledderman’s participation in offenses other than the instant burglary
conviction is supported by the record. Fledderman admitted to being addicted
to drugs; she also acknowledged participating in the other residential entry
cases as evidenced by her testimony that she was planning to make a statement
for the case in Ripley County and had offered to make a statement for the cases
in Dearborn County and Decatur County. The trial court may consider other
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 15A01-1704-CR-850 | November 29, 2017 Page 5 of 8
offenses, even if they have not yet resulted in convictions, when sentencing a
defendant. E.g., Cotto v. State, 829 N.E.2d 520, 526 (Ind. 2005) (noting that a
record of arrest may reveal that a defendant has not been deterred and “may be
relevant to the trial court’s assessment of the defendant’s character in terms of
the risk that [she] will commit another crime”). The offense that the trial court
considered took place in the same time period and in the same way as the
instant burglary. It is apparent that the trial court considered the offense from
Ripley County to emphasize its concern that Fledderman’s addiction was
driving her to increasingly more extreme acts. We find no error with the trial
court’s consideration of this aggravating factor.
II. Appropriateness
[10] Fledderman next argues that her sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature
of the offense and her character. Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B) provides that this
Court may revise a sentence if it is inappropriate in light of the nature of the
offense and the character of the offender. We must “conduct [this] review with
substantial deference and give ‘due consideration’ to the trial court's decision—
since the ‘principal role of [our] review is to attempt to leaven the outliers,’ and
not to achieve a perceived ‘correct’ sentence . . . . ” Knapp v. State, 9 N.E.3d
1274, 1292 (Ind. 2014) (quoting Chambers v. State, 989 N.E.2d 1257, 1259 (Ind.
2013)) (internal citations omitted).
[11] Fledderman pleaded guilty to Level 4 felony burglary, for which she faced a
sentence of two to twelve years imprisonment, with an advisory term of six
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 15A01-1704-CR-850 | November 29, 2017 Page 6 of 8
years. Ind. Code § 35-50-2-5.5. The trial court imposed an eight-year sentence,
with seven years executed and one year suspended to probation.
[12] As for the nature of Fledderman’s offense, Fledderman entered a locked home,
wore latex gloves to avoid detection, and stole $410 cash from the older couple
who lived there. Scudder wrote a letter to the trial court about the emotional
impact that Fledderman’s crime had on her. Scudder wrote that she felt
“traumatized” upon seeing Fledderman inside her home and could not leave
her home for a month. Tr. p. 56. Scudder was prescribed medication to treat
the anxiety that she developed. She further wrote that she felt “violated” and
does not trust anyone anymore. Id. at 57.
[13] As for Fledderman’s character, we note that she has no criminal history;
however, although this conviction is her first, at the time of her sentencing
hearing, she had numerous charges pending against her in Ripley County and
Decatur County for similar offenses. And while we commend Fledderman for
her completion of the Cross Roads recovery program, her history of substance
abuse still puts her at high risk to re-offend. See, e.g., Burgess v. State, 854 N.E.2d
35, 40 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (finding that the defendant’s addiction, to which the
defendant admitted, was evidence of his propensity to re-offend). Fledderman’s
addiction motivated her to commit this burglary as well as other offenses in two
other counties.
[14] Lastly, we note that the State argued for Fledderman to receive a twelve-year
sentence with eight years suspended, followed by intensive outpatient treatment
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 15A01-1704-CR-850 | November 29, 2017 Page 7 of 8
to help Fledderman continue her recovery. The victim requested the trial court
impose a sentence of twelve years with none suspended. The trial court’s
decision to impose an eight-year sentence with one year suspended shows that
the trial court considered Fledderman’s plea, remorse, and completion of the
Cross Roads recovery program, and credited her accordingly. Under these
circumstances, we do not find the sentence inappropriate in light of the nature
of the offense and Fledderman’s character.
[15] The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Riley, J., and Brown, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 15A01-1704-CR-850 | November 29, 2017 Page 8 of 8