Title: Jackson v. State

State: indiana

Issuer: Indiana Supreme Court

Document:

I N  T H E  
Indiana Supreme Court 
Supreme Court Case No. 20S-CR-315 
Thomas K. Jackson, 
Appellant-Defendant, 
–v– 
State of Indiana, 
Appellee-Plaintiff. 
Decided: May 19, 2020 
Appeal from the LaPorte Superior Court, No. 46D01-1704-F3-367 
The Honorable Michael S. Bergerson, Judge 
On Petition to Transfer from the Indiana Court of Appeals,  
No. 19A-CR-796 
Per Curiam Opinion 
Chief Justice Rush and Justice David, Justice Massa, and Justice Goff concur. 
Justice Slaughter dissents, believing transfer should be denied. 
 
 
 
FILED
C L E R K
Indiana Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
and Tax Court
May 19 2020, 12:53 pm
 
 
 
 
Indiana Supreme Court | Case No. 20S-CR-315 | May 19, 2020 
Page 2 of 4 
Per curiam.  
Thomas K. Jackson admitted to having sexual intercourse with K.S. on 
three occasions when she was between 21 and 23 years old, but insisted 
the sex was consensual. The issues at trial were whether K.S., who is 
“moderately intellectually handicap[ped],” could, and did, legally consent 
to sex with Jackson.  
After the first trial on these charges ended in a mistrial when the jury 
could not reach a unanimous verdict, in December 2018 a second jury 
convicted Jackson of three counts of Level 3 felony rape.1 During the 
sentencing hearing, the prosecutor acknowledged that Jackson, then 52 
years old, had led a law-abiding life and recommended that the court 
impose the advisory sentence of nine years for each of the three counts. 
The prosecutor also did not object to a split sentence with part of that time 
served on probation. The trial court instead sentenced Jackson to 
enhanced consecutive sentences of 12 years on each count, for an executed 
sentence of 36 years. Jackson’s earliest possible release date is December 3, 
2045, when he will be 79 years old.  
In a divided decision, the Court of Appeals affirmed Jackson’s 
convictions and sentence. Jackson v. State, No. 19A-CR-796, 2019 WL 
7342368 (Ind. Ct. App. 2019). Judge Brown dissented as to the sentence, 
writing that an enhanced prison term for a low-risk offender with no 
criminal history such as Jackson “does not reflect the goals of reformation 
or rehabilitation.” Id. at *10. 
Jackson petitioned for transfer, which we now grant, vacating the Court 
of Appeals decision. Ind. Appellate Rule 58(A). Jackson challenged his 
convictions in the Court of Appeals, but on transfer argues only that 
imposing consecutive 12-year sentences was excessive absent more 
substantial aggravating factors.  
 
1 Jackson was acquitted of one count of Level 3 felony rape of K.S. at his first trial, though this 
acquittal was not included in the evidence presented at the second trial.  
 
 
 
 
Indiana Supreme Court | Case No. 20S-CR-315 | May 19, 2020 
Page 3 of 4 
The Indiana Constitution authorizes independent appellate review and 
revision of a trial court’s sentencing decision. See IND. CONST. art. 7, §§ 4, 
6; McCain v. State, 88 N.E.3d 1066, 1067 (Ind. 2018). That authority is 
implemented through Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B), which permits this 
Court to revise a sentence if, after due consideration of the trial court’s 
decision, the sentence is found to be inappropriate in light of the nature of 
the offense and the character of the offender. Rule 7(B) “places central 
focus on the role of the trial judge, while reserving for the appellate court 
the chance to review the matter in a climate more distant from local 
clamor.” Serino v. State, 798 N.E.2d 852, 856-57 (Ind. 2003). “Ultimately, 
our constitutional authority to review and revise sentences boils down to 
our collective sense of what is appropriate.” Taylor v. State, 86 N.E.3d 157, 
165 (Ind. 2017) (cleaned up), reh’g denied.  
During the sentencing hearing, the prosecutor and trial court identified 
two mitigating factors: Jackson’s lack of criminal history and his low risk 
to reoffend as identified in the Presentence Investigation Report. 
Aggravators included Jackson’s violation of a position of trust and his lack 
of remorse—though the trial court conceded that the latter was “consistent 
with [Jackson’s] claim of a consensual relationship.” Sentencing Order at 
3. The prosecutor recommended that Jackson receive the advisory 
sentence for each charge, for a total of 27 years.  
Whether a sentence should be deemed inappropriate “turns on our 
sense of 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). Pursuant 
to our authority under Appellate Rule 7(B), we find that exceeding the 27-
year sentence the prosecutor recommended, absent more significant 
aggravating factors, is inappropriate under the circumstances of this case.  
Accordingly, we revise Jackson’s sentence to 27 years, with seven of 
those years suspended to probation. We summarily affirm the remainder 
of the Court of Appeals opinion, Ind. Appellate R. 58(A)(2), and remand 
to the trial court to issue a revised sentencing order consistent with this 
opinion.  
 
 
 
 
Indiana Supreme Court | Case No. 20S-CR-315 | May 19, 2020 
Page 4 of 4 
Rush, C.J., and David, Massa, and Goff, JJ., concur. 
Slaughter, J., dissents, believing transfer should be denied. 
A TT O R N E Y F O R  A PP E LLA N T 
Elizabeth A. Flynn 
Braje, Nelson & Janes, LLP 
Michigan City, Indiana 
A TT O R N E Y F O R  A PP E LLE E 
Josiah J. Swinney 
Deputy Attorney General 
Indianapolis, Indiana