MEMORANDUM DECISION
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D),
this Memorandum Decision shall not be
regarded as precedent or cited before any
FILED
court except for the purpose of establishing May 23 2019, 10:25 am
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
Matthew D. Anglemeyer Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
Indianapolis, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana
Matthew B. Mackenzie
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
James Edward Williams, Jr., May 23, 2019
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
18A-CR-2764
v. Appeal from the Marion Superior
Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable Kurt M. Eisgruber,
Appellee-Plaintiff. Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
49G01-1704-F1-15309
Pyle, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2764 | May 23, 2019 Page 1 of 8
Statement of the Case
[1] James Williams (“Williams”) appeals the seventy-year aggregate sentence
imposed after he pleaded guilty to Class A felony child molesting, 1 two counts
of Level 1 felony child molesting,2 two counts of Level 4 felony sexual
misconduct with a minor,3 and three counts of Class C felony child molesting. 4
He argues that his sentence is inappropriate in light of his character and the
nature of his offenses. Concluding that the sentence is not inappropriate, we
affirm Williams’ sentence.
[2] We affirm.
Issue
Whether Williams’ sentence is inappropriate in light of the
nature of his offense and his character.
1
IND. CODE § 35-42-4-3. The charging information alleged that this offense occurred “[o]n or about or
between August 1, 2012 and June 1, 2013.” (App. at 17). Effective July 1, 2014, this offense was reclassified
as a Level 1 felony. Because Williams committed this offense before that date, it retains its classification as a
Class A felony.
2
I.C. § 35-42-4-3. The charging information alleged that these offenses occurred “[o]n or about or between
October 21, 2015 and June 30, 2016.” (App. at 18).
3
I.C. § 35-42-4-9. The charging information alleges that these offenses occurred “[o]n or about or between
December 1, 2016 and April 23, 2017” and “[o]n or about or between April 1, 2017 and April 5, 2017.”
(App. at 18).
4
I.C. § 35-42-4-3. The charging information alleges that these offenses all occurred “[o]n or about or
between August 1, 2012 and June 30, 2013.” (App. at 18-19). Effective July 1, 2014, this offense was
reclassified as a Level 4 felony. Because Williams committed these offenses before that date, they retain their
classification as Class C felonies.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2764 | May 23, 2019 Page 2 of 8
Facts
[1] Williams was in a relationship with D.B.’s (“D.B.”) mother (“Mother”) from
2009 to 2017, and they have two children together. Williams began having
intercourse with D.B. in 2012, when she was ten years old and Williams was
forty-four years old. The first incident of intercourse occurred when Williams
called D.B. into his bedroom, sat her on the edge of the bed, took off her pants,
and told her that he was “getting her ready for when she [was] older.” (App.
Vol. 2 at 14). Williams inserted his penis into D.B.’s vagina, had sexual
intercourse with her until he pulled out, and then ejaculated on the floor.
Williams pulled up D.B.’s pants and told her that if she told anyone what had
happened, they would both be in trouble.
[2] For five years, Williams fondled D.B., performed oral sex on her, had her
perform oral sex on him, and had vaginal intercourse with her. The last time
Williams had intercourse with D.B. was in April 2017, when he told her to go
upstairs to the bedroom closet. Williams followed D.B. up the stairs, told her
to get on her hands and knees, pulled down her pants, and had sexual
intercourse with her from behind. Williams ejaculated partially in D.B.’s
vagina and partially on the closet floor.
[3] Several weeks later, Williams suspected that D.B. was pregnant because she
was gaining weight and had missed her period. Williams searched the internet
for ways to terminate pregnancies. He gave D.B. Excedrin migraine pills every
day and told her to boil and drink cinnamon because he believed that it would
cause her to have a miscarriage.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2764 | May 23, 2019 Page 3 of 8
[4] Mother noticed the search history on Williams’ phone and questioned Williams
about it. He subsequently told D.B. to tell Mother that she had been raped at
gunpoint. During a discussion of the phone search, D.B. broke down and
admitted that Williams had been molesting her for five years. Tests revealed
that Williams had impregnated D.B.
[5] The State charged Williams with: (1) Class A felony child molesting; (2-3) two
counts of Level 1 felony child molesting; (4-5) two counts of Level 4 felony
sexual misconduct with a minor; and (6-8) three counts of Class C felony child
molesting. Williams admitted that that he had been having intercourse with
D.B. at least once a month, and sometimes once a week, for five years and pled
guilty to all of the charged offenses.
[6] The trial court held a sentencing hearing in October 2018. At the hearing, the
State told the trial court that Mother had intended to attend the hearing;
however, she had been receiving threats for cooperating in the proceedings.
She became so frightened by the threats that she had moved into a shelter in
northwestern Indiana with her children. Mother sent a letter that she had asked
the State to read into the record and present to the trial court. In the letter,
Mother explained that being molested for five years had been “extremely
strenuous on D.B. and her emotional well-being . . . [and] ha[d] changed [her]
overall outlook on life and her future.” (Tr. at 19). Mother further explained
that following Williams’ arrest, the State had opened a case against her, which
had resulted in her losing her state childcare license and source of income. She
and her children had eventually become homeless and had had to move to
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2764 | May 23, 2019 Page 4 of 8
northwestern Indiana to stay with family. D.B. had lost her position on the
travel dance team that had provided her with safety and security. Mother
further explained that D.B. “had had her innocence stolen from her not only
once but hundreds of times.” (Tr. 19). The Pre-Sentence Investigation Report
revealed that Williams has a prior felony conviction in California for
transporting a narcotic.
[7] The trial court sentenced Williams to: thirty (30) years for the Class A felony
child molesting conviction; thirty (30) years for each of the two Level 1 felony
child molesting conviction; six (6) years for each of the two Level 4 felony
sexual misconduct with a minor convictions; and four (4) years for each of the
three Class C felony child molesting convictions. The trial court further
ordered the thirty-year sentence for the Class A felony child molesting
conviction, one of the thirty-year sentences for a Level 1 felony child molesting
conviction, one of the six-year sentences for a Level 4 felony sexual misconduct
with a minor conviction, and one of the four-year sentences for a Class C felony
child molesting conviction to run consecutively with each other, for a total
executed sentence of seventy (70) years. Williams now appeals his sentence.
Decision
[8] Williams argues that his seventy-year 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
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2764 | May 23, 2019 Page 5 of 8
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).
[9] 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.” Id. at 1222. “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 substantial virtuous traits or
persistent examples of good character).” Stephenson v. State, 29 N.E.3d 111, 122
(Ind. 2015).
[10] When determining whether a sentence is inappropriate, 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. The sentencing range for a
Class A felony is twenty (20) years to fifty (50) years, and the advisory sentence
is thirty (30) years. IND. CODE § 35-50-2-4. The sentencing range for a Level 1
felony is twenty (20) to forty (40) years, and the advisory sentence is thirty (30)
years. IND. CODE § 35-50-2-4. The sentencing range for a Level 4 felony is two
(2) and twelve (12) years, and the advisory sentence is six (6) years. IND. CODE
35 -50-2-5.5. Lastly, the sentencing range for a Class C felony is two (2) to eight
(8) years, and the advisory sentence is four (4) years. IND. CODE § 35-50-2-6.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2764 | May 23, 2019 Page 6 of 8
[11] Here, the trial court sentenced Williams to the advisory sentence for each
offense, which includes thirty years for each Class A and Level 1 felony, six
years for each Level 4 felony, and four years for each Class C felony. The trial
court further ordered the sentences for the Class A felony, one of the Level 1
felonies, one of the Level 4 felonies, and one of the Class C felonies to run
consecutively to each other, for a total executed sentence of seventy years. This
is well below the 178-year maximum executed sentence that trial court could
have ordered.
[12] Regarding the nature of the offense, we note that Williams began having
intercourse with D.B. when she was ten years old under the guise of “getting
her ready for when she was older.” (App. Vol. 2 at 14). For the next five years,
he sexually victimized the young girl at least once per month and sometimes
once per week. As a result of the offenses, D.B. became pregnant, and Mother
lost her childcare license and her ability to support her family. She and her
children subsequently became homeless.
[13] Regarding Williams’ character, we note that Williams, who has a prior felony
conviction for transporting narcotics, abused his position of trust with both
D.B. and Mother by molesting D.B. for five years and threatening her not to tell
anyone. Then, when Williams believed that D.B. was pregnant, he attempted
to induce a miscarriage and he told D.B. to lie to Mother about how she had
become pregnant.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2764 | May 23, 2019 Page 7 of 8
[14] Williams has failed to meet his burden to persuade this Court that his aggregate
seventy-year sentence is inappropriate.
[15] Affirmed.
Riley, J., and Bailey, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2764 | May 23, 2019 Page 8 of 8