Attorney for Appellant Attorneys for Appellee
David W. Stone, IV Steve Carter
Anderson, Indiana Attorney General of
Indiana
George P. Sherman
Deputy Attorney General of
Indiana
____________________________________________________________________________
__
In the
Indiana Supreme Court
_________________________________
No. 48S02-0412-CR-533
Sandy Diane Pugh,
Appellant (Defendant below),
v.
State of Indiana,
Appellee (Plaintiff below).
_________________________________
Appeal from the Madison Superior Court, No. 48D01-0007-CF-00269
The Honorable Dennis D. Carroll, Judge
_________________________________
On Petition To Transfer from the Indiana Court of Appeals, No. 48A02-0310-
CR-00934
_________________________________
December 21, 2004
Sullivan, Justice.
The Court of Appeals held that the trial court lacked authority to
order less than the entire amount of the sentence originally suspended when
it revoked Defendant Sandy Diane Pugh’s probation. Following our opinion
in Stephens v. State, we hold that when a trial court revokes a defendant’s
probation, it may order less than the entire amount of the sentence
originally suspended.
On August 28, 2000, Defendant Sandy Diane Pugh pled guilty to public
intoxication, resisting law enforcement, and escape. The trial court
sentenced Defendant to five years imprisonment and ordered three-and-a-half
of those years suspended to probation. On May 14, 2003, the State filed a
Notice of Probation Violation alleging that Pugh had been charged with
battery and public intoxication, and that she violated curfew and used
alcoholic beverages or illicit drugs. The trial court found that Defendant
violated probation by consuming alcohol, revoked Defendant’s probation, and
ordered her to serve two years of executed time.
Defendant appealed the trial court’s revocation of her probation. The
Court of Appeals held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in
revoking Defendant’s probation, and, reasoning from an earlier case,
Stephens v. State, 801 N.E.2d 1288 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004), rev’d, No. 49S02-
0404-CR-152, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. 2004), the court held sua sponte that the
trial court lacked authority to order less than the amount of the sentence
originally suspended. Pugh v. State, 804 N.E.2d 202, 204-05 (Ind. Ct. App.
2004). We grant transfer and now affirm the trial court.
We summarily affirm the part of the Court of Appeals’ opinion
upholding the trial court’s decision to revoke Defendant’s probation. Ind.
Appellate Rule 58(A)(2).
Based on our opinion in Stephens v. State, we vacate that part of the
Court of Appeals’ opinion holding that a trial court must order the entire
amount of the sentence originally suspended if it revokes a defendant’s
probation.
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Shepard, C.J., and Dickson, Boehm, and Rucker, JJ., concur.