MEMORANDUM DECISION
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D),
this Memorandum Decision shall not be FILED
regarded as precedent or cited before any Aug 09 2019, 9:03 am
court except for the purpose of establishing CLERK
the defense of res judicata, collateral Indiana Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
estoppel, or the law of the case. and Tax Court
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Thomas C. Allen Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
Fort Wayne, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana
Megan M. Smith
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Terence L. Riley, August 9, 2019
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
19A-CR-659
v. Appeal from the Allen Superior
Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable Frances C. Gull,
Appellee-Plaintiff Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
02D05-1712-F5-344
Baker, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-659 | August 9, 2019 Page 1 of 4
[1] Terence Riley appeals the sentence imposed by the trial court after Riley was
convicted of Level 5 felony domestic battery, arguing that the sentence is
inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and his character. Finding
that the sentence is not inappropriate, we affirm.
[2] In July 2016, Riley battered his wife, Barbara Harris, punching her in the face
multiple times. He was convicted of domestic battery in Steuben County for
that incident.
[3] In October 2017, Riley was still on probation for the domestic battery
conviction. On October 9, 2017, Riley initiated an argument with Harris. He
punched her repeatedly in the face. Scared, Harris ran into a bathroom and
locked the door. He followed her and kicked down the door. With blood
running down her face and a swollen eye, Harris begged Riley to let her go to
the hospital. After she promised that she would not call the police, he allowed
her to leave and she drove herself to the hospital. She received five stitches in
her forehead and was treated for bruising on her cheek and a sprain of her bicep
tendon. The laceration on her forehead could still be seen at the time of Riley’s
trial and is likely permanent.
[4] On December 1, 2017, the State charged Riley with Level 5 felony domestic
battery, Level 6 felony domestic battery resulting in moderate bodily injury, and
Level 6 felony domestic battery with a prior unrelated conviction. 1 While the
1
The State later dismissed the charge for domestic battery with a prior unrelated conviction.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-659 | August 9, 2019 Page 2 of 4
charges were pending, Riley encouraged Harris not to cooperate with the
prosecutor’s office, telling her that if she refused to cooperate, the case would
get dismissed. Riley’s jury trial took place on February 5-6, 2019. The jury
found Riley guilty as charged and the trial court vacated the Level 6 felony
conviction on double jeopardy grounds. On March 13, 2019, the trial court
sentenced Riley to six years in the Department of Correction. Riley now
appeals.
[5] Riley’s sole argument on appeal is that the sentence is inappropriate in light of
the nature of the offenses and his character pursuant to Indiana Appellate Rule
7(B). 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). For a Level 5 felony conviction, Riley faced a possible
sentence of one to six years imprisonment, with an advisory term of three years.
Ind. Code § 35-50-2-6(b). The trial court imposed a maximum six-year term.
[6] With respect to the nature of the offense, Riley battered his wife, striking her
with such force that she needed five stitches in her forehead and had injuries to
her cheek and arm. The scarring as a result of the laceration in her forehead
may be permanent. He refused to let her go to the hospital until she promised
not to call the police.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-659 | August 9, 2019 Page 3 of 4
[7] With respect to Riley’s character, we note that he has a significant criminal
history. He has been convicted three times of battery, twice of dealing in
cocaine or a narcotic drug, once of possession with intent to distribute cocaine
base “crack,” and once of operating while intoxicated. He has had many
chances to reflect on his behavior and change his ways, including shorter
sentences, longer sentences, time with the Center for Nonviolence, residential
placement, and the Alcohol Countermeasure Program. He has had suspended
sentences revoked twice, placements modified twice, and a federal sentence
modified twice. He was on probation for the same offense—battering his
wife—when he committed the very same act in this case. As soon as he
battered her, his first thought was of himself, and he began trying to convince
her not to call the police. After the State filed charges, he continued to
manipulate the situation by encouraging her not to cooperate with the
prosecutor’s office. He has never shown remorse or accepted any responsibility
for his actions. Given this record, we find that the sentence imposed by the trial
court was not inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense or his character.
[8] The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Kirsch, J., and Crone, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 19A-CR-659 | August 9, 2019 Page 4 of 4