Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A03-1509-CR-1385 | May 4, 2016 Page 1 of 6

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), 

this Memorandum Decision shall not be 

regarded as precedent or cited before any 

court except for the purpose of establishing 

the defense of res judicata, collateral 

estoppel, or the law of the case.

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT

Stanley L. Campbell

Fort Wayne, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE

Gregory F. Zoeller

Attorney General of Indiana

Lyubov Gore

Deputy Attorney General

Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE

COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Abiodun O. Bratton,

Appellant-Defendant,

v.

State of Indiana,

Appellee-Plaintiff.

May 4, 2016

Court of Appeals Case No.

02A03-1509-CR-1385

Appeal from the Allen Superior 

Court

The Honorable Wendy W. Davis, 

Judge

Trial Court Cause No.

02D06-1503-F6-251

May, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A03-1509-CR-1385 | May 4, 2016 Page 2 of 6

[1] Abiodun Bratton was convicted of two counts of Level 6 felony residential 

entry,1 one count of Level 6 felony resisting law enforcement,2 and two counts 

of Class B misdemeanor battery.3

 The court imposed an aggregate sentence of 

3.5 years. Bratton argues that his sentence is inappropriate in light of his 

character and offense. We affirm. 

Facts and Procedural History

[2] On the evening of March 17, 2015, Bratton smoked synthetic marijuana. He

then entered the home of D.W., who did not know Bratton. D.W. was 

frightened and told Bratton to leave, but he refused. Bratton told D.W. he was 

being chased by someone and asked her to call the police, but when D.W. tried 

to call the police, Bratton grabbed her phone, hit D.W. in the face, and ran 

from the house with her phone.

[3] A few moments later, Bratton knocked on the door of D.P.’s home. D.P. 

mistook Bratton for her brother and opened the door. Bratton pushed his way 

into the house, locked the door behind him, and announced the police were 

after him. D.P.’s children were scared, causing them to scream and cry. D.P. 

and Bratton struggled physically, causing D.P. pain, and D.P. was afraid 

 

1 Ind. Code § 35-43-2-1.5 (2014).

2 Ind. Code § 35-44.1-3-1 (2014).

3 Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1 (2014).
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A03-1509-CR-1385 | May 4, 2016 Page 3 of 6

because she thought Bratton wanted to hurt her. Bratton took D.P.’s cell 

phone, and she convinced him to leave.

[4] When officers apprehended Bratton a short time later, he was yelling and acting 

mentally unstable. Officers placed Bratton in the back of a police car, but he 

refused to put his legs and feet inside the car so the door could be closed. 

Bratton then forced his way out of the car and stood up. His sudden action 

caused one officer to hit his knee on the curb, resulting in an abrasion, pain, and 

swelling of that knee. 

[5] The State charged Bratton with two counts of Level 6 felony residential entry, 

one count of Level 6 felony resisting law enforcement, and two counts of Class 

B misdemeanor battery based on his touching D.W. and D.P. Bratton pled 

guilty to those crimes. The trial court found aggravators in Bratton’s criminal 

history that involved firearms and drug trafficking, and in his failure to be 

rehabilitated by prior punishments. The trial court found Bratton’s guilty plea

as a mitigator. The court then imposed sentences of two years for each 

residential entry, 180 days for each battery, and 1.5 years for resisting law 

enforcement. The court ordered the four sentences for residential entry and 

battery served concurrently and the sentence for resisting law enforcement 

served consecutive to those for an aggregate sentence of 3.5 years.

Discussion and Decision

[6] Bratton asks that we revise his sentence. We may grant his request if, “after 

due consideration of the trial court’s decision, the Court finds that the sentence 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A03-1509-CR-1385 | May 4, 2016 Page 4 of 6

is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and the character of the 

offender.” Ind. Appellate Rule 7(B). We give considerable deference to a trial 

court’s sentencing decision, and its decision should be affirmed “unless 

overcome by compelling evidence portraying in a positive light the nature of the 

offense (such as accompanied by restraint, regard, and lack of brutality) and the 

defendant’s character (such as substantial virtuous traits or persistent examples 

of good character).” Stephenson v. State, 29 N.E.3d 111, 122 (Ind. 2015). The 

appellant bears the burden of demonstrating his sentence is inappropriate. 

Childress v. State, 848 N.E.2d 1073, 1080 (Ind. 2006). 

[7] When considering the nature of the offense, the advisory sentence is the starting 

point to determine the appropriateness of a sentence. Anglemyer v. State, 868 

N.E.2d 482, 494 (Ind. 2007), clarified on reh’g 878 N.E.2d 218 (Ind. 2007). To 

determine the appropriateness of a deviation from the advisory sentence, we 

consider “whether there is anything more or less egregious about the offense 

committed by the defendant that makes it different from the ‘typical’ offense 

accounted for by the legislature when it set the advisory sentence.” Johnson v. 

State, 986 N.E.2d 852, 856 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013). 

[8] Bratton pled guilty to three Level 6 felonies and two Class B misdemeanors. 

“A person who commits a Level 6 felony (for a crime committed after June 30, 

2014) shall be imprisoned for a fixed term of between six (6) months and two 

and one-half years, with the advisory sentence being one (1) year.” Ind. Code § 

35-50-2-7 (2014). “A person who commits a Class B misdemeanor shall be 

imprisoned for a fixed term of not more than one hundred eighty (180) days.” 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A03-1509-CR-1385 | May 4, 2016 Page 5 of 6

Ind. Code § 35-50-3-3 (1977). In light of the range of sentences Bratton could 

have received,4 we see nothing inappropriate about his 3.5-year sentence.

[9] Bratton voluntarily consumed an illegal drug to which he admitted being 

addicted and which caused him to become paranoid and mentally unstable. He 

then entered two separate residences, battering a woman inside each of those 

homes. In one of the homes, two young children screamed and cried as they 

watched Bratton attack their mother and, thereafter, they had trouble sleeping 

because they were afraid someone would break into their house. As Bratton left 

each of those homes, he took the occupant’s cell phone with him. The third 

person Bratton injured physically was a police officer. Bratton had already 

been placed into the police car, but he shoved his way out of the car, knocking 

the officer down in the process and causing injury to his knee. As Bratton’s five 

convictions resulted in physical injury to three adults and negatively impacted

two children, we find nothing inappropriate about a 3.5-year sentence. 

[10] To assess Bratton’s character, one relevant fact we consider is Bratton’s 

criminal history. See Rutherford v. State, 866 N.E.2d 867, 874 (Ind. Ct. App. 

2007). The significance of criminal history varies based on the gravity, nature, 

and number of prior offenses in relation to the current offense. Id. Bratton’s 

 

4 Because felony resisting law enforcement is a “crime of violence,” Ind. Code § 35-50-1-2(a)(16), the total 

consecutive term of imprisonment that Bratton could have received was not limited to the four years 

provided by Ind. Code § 35-50-1-2(d)(1). See Ind. Code § 35-50-1-2(c) (explaining consecutive sentences for 

“felony convictions arising out of an episode of criminal conduct shall not exceed the period described in 

subsection (d),” “except for crimes of violence”) (emphasis added). 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A03-1509-CR-1385 | May 4, 2016 Page 6 of 6

criminal history includes two convictions -- a misdemeanor for driving without 

a license, and a federal felony for possessing a firearm while drug trafficking. 

During the three years of supervised release Bratton received for the felony, the 

court first had to modify his release to require community service because 

Bratton had not obtained employment. Then, eighteen months later, the court 

revoked his release and ordered Bratton back to prison for five months. Despite 

having completed substance abuse treatment in jail in 2005 and recognizing his 

addiction to synthetic marijuana, Bratton admittedly used that drug daily from 

2009 until 2015, without seeking assistance to quit. These facts do not suggest a 

3.5 year sentence is inappropriate for Bratton’s character.

Conclusion

[11] Bratton has not demonstrated that his sentence is inappropriate in light of his 

character and offense. Accordingly, we affirm his cumulative 3.5 year sentence 

for three Level 6 felonies and two Class B misdemeanors. 

[12] Affirmed. 

Baker, J., and Brown, J., concur.