MEMORANDUM DECISION
FILED
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D),
this Memorandum Decision shall not be Jun 27 2019, 8:10 am
regarded as precedent or cited before any CLERK
Indiana Supreme Court
court except for the purpose of establishing Court of Appeals
and Tax Court
the defense of res judicata, collateral
estoppel, or the law of the case.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Kristin A. Mulholland Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
Public Defender Attorney General of Indiana
Crown Point, Indiana
Megan M. Smith
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Christopher E. Campbell, June 27, 2019
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
19A-CR-303
v. Appeal from the Lake Superior
Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable Clarence D.
Appellee-Plaintiff Murray, Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
45G02-1705-F4-19
Baker, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-303 | June 27, 2019 Page 1 of 6
[1] Christopher Campbell appeals the ten-year sentence imposed by the trial court
after he pleaded guilty to Level 4 Felony Causing Death When Operating a
Motor Vehicle, arguing that the sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature
of the offense and his character. Finding the sentence not inappropriate, we
affirm.
Facts
[2] On October 17, 2016, Campbell was driving near 73rd Avenue in Merrillville
when he struck then-seventeen-year-old Andrew Salka, who had been walking
near the roadway. It was later determined that Campbell had been driving in
excess of the speed limit. Salka sustained numerous injuries, including a skull
fracture and fractures in his upper and lower extremities. He was first
transported to Methodist Hospital and then transported to Loyola Hospital,
where Salka later died of his injuries. Campbell was also taken to Methodist
Hospital, where he was treated for his injuries and underwent a medical
evaluation. The results from that evaluation concluded that Campbell tested
positive for schedule I hallucinogenic drugs, schedule II opiates, and schedule
IV depressants.
[3] At the time of this incident, Campbell’s driving privileges had been suspended
for ten years, with an expiration date of October 21, 2023. Also, Campbell had
had his driver’s license suspended forty-nine times since 1991. Campbell has an
extensive criminal record, which includes convictions for Class B misdemeanor
reckless driving, Class A misdemeanor possession of marijuana, Class A
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-303 | June 27, 2019 Page 2 of 6
misdemeanor possession of drug paraphernalia, Class A misdemeanor
operating while intoxicated, Class C misdemeanor operating while intoxicated,
Class D felony operating while intoxicated, and Class A misdemeanor driving
while suspended.
[4] On May 22, 2017, the State charged Campbell with one count of Level 4 felony
causing death when operating a motor vehicle, one count of Level 5 felony
causing death when operating a motor vehicle, and one count of Level 6 felony
operating a motor vehicle as an habitual traffic offender. On November 14,
2018, Campbell entered into a guilty plea agreement, pursuant to which he
agreed to plead guilty to the Level 4 felony charge in exchange for dismissal of
the other charges. Additionally, the State agreed to cap sentencing for
Campbell’s Level 4 felony conviction at ten years. At Campbell’s January 8,
2019, sentencing hearing, the trial court heard testimony from Campbell,
counsel from both parties, and witnesses. Thereafter, the trial court sentenced
Campbell to ten years in the Department of Correct (DOC), the maximum term
permitted under the plea agreement. Campbell now appeals.
Discussion and Decision
[5] Campbell’s sole argument on appeal is that the sentence imposed by the trial
court is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and his character.
Specifically, Campbell contends that the trial court should not have imposed
the maximum ten years in the DOC and that his sentence should have included
placement in community corrections to treat his alleged opiate addiction.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-303 | June 27, 2019 Page 3 of 6
[6] Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B) states that a “Court may revise a sentence . . . 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.” The defendant bears the burden of persuading us that his
sentence is inappropriate. Childress v. State, 848 N.E.2d 1073, 1080 (Ind. 2006).
In determining whether the sentence is inappropriate, we will consider
numerous factors such as 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.” Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219, 1224 (Ind. 2008). It is our
job to leaven the outliers, not to achieve a perceived “correct” sentencing result.
Id. at 1225. Even though the State agreed to cap sentencing for his Level 4
felony conviction at ten years, the trial court’s sentence is still subject to a 7(B)
review. See Rivera v. State, 851 N.E.2d 299, 301 (Ind. 2006) (holding that if “a[]
[plea] agreement . . . provides for a sentencing cap or range, the trial court still
must exercise discretion in determining the sentence it will impose”).
[7] The maximum sentence for a Level 4 felony causing death when operating a
motor vehicle conviction is twelve years, and the minimum sentence is two
years. Ind. Code § 35-50-2-5.5. The advisory sentence is six years. Id. Here,
pursuant to the limits established in the plea agreement, the trial court
sentenced Campbell to ten years in the DOC, the maximum term permitted.
[8] First, as to the nature of the offense, Campbell committed a heinous offense
with multiple drugs—both legal and illegal—in his system. Campbell claims
that he “self-medicates after a workplace injury that led to a back surgery,”
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-303 | June 27, 2019 Page 4 of 6
appellant’s br. p. 10, and that the cocktail of drugs found in his system is the
result of a self-diagnosed opiate addiction. However, Campbell’s medical
evaluation revealed that he had ingested hallucinogens, opiates, and
depressants—a lethal combination of both medicinal and recreational drugs.
Also, even though his license had been suspended forty-nine times in the past
and was suspended at the time of the incident, Campbell drove his vehicle over
the speed limit and recklessly killed another human being. Campbell
disregarded the law, got behind the wheel, and thought it would be wise to
drive with a bevy of drugs flowing through his body. Therefore, we find that the
nature of Campbell’s offense does not render his sentence inappropriate.
[9] Next, as to the character of the offender, Campbell has a long criminal history,
including convictions for Class B misdemeanor reckless driving, Class A
misdemeanor possession of marijuana, Class A misdemeanor possession of
drug paraphernalia, Class A misdemeanor operating while intoxicated, Class C
misdemeanor operating while intoxicated, Class D felony operating while
intoxicated, and Class A misdemeanor driving while suspended. See Rutherford
v. State, 866 N.E.2d 867, 874 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (holding that “it is
appropriate to consider such a [criminal] record as a poor reflection on the
defendant’s character, because it may reveal that he . . . has not been deterred
even after having been subjected to the police authority of the State[]”). Most, if
not all, of these offenses involve the use of intoxicating or mind-altering
substances and the operation of a motor vehicle. Campbell has defied the law
many times and continues to do so to this day. It is clear from Campbell’s
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-303 | June 27, 2019 Page 5 of 6
criminal record and the behavior he exhibited in this case that he shows no
signs of reform, despite multiple opportunities for improvement. Therefore, we
find that Campbell’s character does not render his sentence inappropriate. 1
[10] In sum, we will not revise Campbell’s sentence pursuant to Indiana Appellate
Rule 7(B).
[11] The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Najam, J., and Robb, J., concur.
1
Despite Campbell’s claim that he should have been placed in community corrections for at least part of his
sentence to treat his alleged opiate addiction, we point out that Campbell has had opportunities in the past to
treat his substance abuse issues, including treatment as part of an acute detox program in 2010, prior
placement in community corrections during probation, and participation in a victim impact panel. See Sent’g
Tr. Vol. III p. 30-32. We fail to see how additional probation or further placement in community corrections
will serve as a deterrent to Campbell’s ongoing streak of criminal behavior.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-303 | June 27, 2019 Page 6 of 6