Opinion

Schaaf v. State

  • 54 N.E.3d 1041
  • 2016 Ind. App. LEXIS 157
  • 2016 WL 2899460
Court
Indiana Court of Appeals
Filed
May 18, 2016
Status
Published
Author
Mathias
On the bench
Barnes, Mathias, Vaidik
Cited by
60 cases
Authority
More cited than 19.2%

holding evidence was sufficient to support defendant’s conviction of dealing as an accomplice where defendant was present at the scene of the crime, was a companion of the principal, failed to oppose the crime, suggested the place for the buy to occur, and allowed the buy to take place in his vehicle

How later courts described this case

  • holding evidence was sufficient to support defendant’s conviction of dealing as an accomplice where defendant was present at the scene of the crime, was a companion of the principal, failed to oppose the crime, suggested the place for the buy to occur, and allowed the buy to take place in his vehicle
  • revising a sentence upon finding that although the defendant’s criminal history was significant and ‘would make a below-advisory sentence too lenient, the nature of his “relatively minor” offenses rendered his above-advisory sentences too harsh
  • noting rule that a person can be charged as a principal and convicted as an accomplice even if he did not participate in each and every element of the crime
  • evidence sufficient to convict Schaaf as an accomplice in dealing heroin; Schaaf drove a friend to gas station, allowed a confidential informant to enter his car, and witnessed the deal

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

MATHIAS, Judge,

concurring in part and dissenting in part.

[17] I agree that Schaafs convictions are supported by sufficient evidence. However, with all due and great respect for my colleagues, I respectfully dissent with regard to the majority’s decision to revise Schaafs sentence. The forty-year sentence imposed was less than the maximum, and giving due deference-to the trial court, I believe the sentence was not inappropriate in light of the offender’s character. Ind. App. R. 7(B); Anglemyer v. State, 868 N.E.2d 482 (Ind.2007).

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.