Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2249 | February 18, 2019 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.

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT

R. Patrick Magrath

Matthew T. Bates

Alcorn Sage Schwartz & Magrath, LLP

Madison, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE

Curtis T. Hills, Jr.

Attorney General of Indiana

Robert Austin Rowlett

Indianapolis, Indiana 

I N T H E

COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Larry P. Johnson,

Appellant-Defendant,

v.

State of Indiana,

Appellee-Plaintiff.

February 18, 2019

Court of Appeals Case No.

18A-CR-2249

Appeal from the Dearborn 

Superior Court

The Honorable Sally A. 

McLaughlin, Judge

Trial Court Cause No.

15D02-1803-F6-80

Pyle, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2249 | February 18, 2019 Page 2 of 6

Statement of the Case

[1] Larry P. Johnson (“Johnson”) appeals the two-year sentence imposed for his 

Level 6 felony escape conviction,1 arguing that it is inappropriate. Concluding 

that Johnson has failed to show that his sentence is inappropriate, we affirm his 

sentence.

[2] We affirm.

Issue

Whether Johnson’s sentence is inappropriate pursuant to Indiana 

Appellate Rule 7(B).

Facts

[3] On February 27, 2018, after Johnson had been convicted of Class A 

misdemeanor criminal trespass, the trial court imposed a one (1) year sentence 

and suspended all of it to reporting probation, which included work release and 

GPS monitoring.2 Less than two weeks later, on March 6, 2018, Johnson 

removed his GPS monitoring device and threw it behind a dumpster.

 

1

IND. CODE § 35-44.1-3-4.

2 The same day, Johnson was also sentenced in two separate causes, and these sentences were ordered to be 

served consecutively to the above criminal trespass conviction. In one of these causes, he was convicted of 

Class A misdemeanor theft and Class A misdemeanor criminal trespass and was sentenced to concurrent one 

(1) year executed sentences for each conviction. In the other cause, he was convicted of Class A 

misdemeanor invasion of privacy and was sentenced to a one (1) year sentence suspended to probation.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2249 | February 18, 2019 Page 3 of 6

[4] Thereafter, the State charged Johnson with Level 6 felony escape. Johnson 

entered into a plea agreement, pled guilty to the crime as charged, and agreed to 

open sentencing. The trial court accepted Johnson’s plea and entered judgment 

of conviction. When sentencing Johnson, the trial court found Johnson’s guilty 

plea to be a mitigating circumstance. The trial court found Johnson’s criminal 

history, which the trial court stated was “significant” and “quite extensive” and

included his violations of probation and community corrections, to be an 

aggravating circumstance. (Tr. 17, 18). The trial court determined that 

Johnson did “not appear to be someone who could be a candidate that could be 

helped by probation[.]” (Tr. 18). The trial court imposed a two (2) year 

sentence and stated that the “reason for the sentence is, again, [his] extensive 

criminal history and history of probation violations and violations of 

community corrections[.]” (Tr. 18). Johnson now appeals.

Decision

[5] Johnson argues that his two-year sentence is inappropriate. We may revise a 

sentence if it is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and the 

character of the offender. Ind. Appellate Rule 7(B). The defendant has the 

burden of persuading us that his sentence is inappropriate. Childress v. State, 848 

N.E.2d 1073, 1080 (Ind. 2006). The principal role of a Rule 7(B) review 

“should be to attempt to leaven the outliers, and identify some guiding 

principles for trial courts and those charged with improvement of the sentencing 

statutes, but not to achieve a perceived ‘correct’ result in each case.” Cardwell v. 

State, 895 N.E.2d 1219, 1225 (Ind. 2008). 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2249 | February 18, 2019 Page 4 of 6

[6] When determining whether a sentence is inappropriate, we acknowledge that 

the advisory sentence “is the starting point the Legislature has selected as an 

appropriate sentence for the crime committed.” Childress, 848 N.E.2d at 1081. 

Here, Johnson entered a guilty plea and was convicted of Level 6 felony escape. 

A Level 6 felony has a sentencing range of six (6) months to two and one-half 

(21⁄2) years with an advisory sentence of one (1) year. I.C. § 35-50-2-7(b). The 

trial court imposed a two-year sentence, which is less than the maximum 

sentence. 

[7] The nature of Johnson’s offense involved him removing his GPS monitoring 

device and throwing it behind a dumpster. He argues that his crime was not 

“particularly heinous or extreme” and did not involve any “egregious 

behavior.” (Johnson’s Br. 9). Johnson attempts to diminish the nature of his 

offense by focusing on the method he used to remove the GPS monitor, stating 

that he disassembled it instead of cutting it off. Johnson fails to grasp that he 

was shown leniency by being placed on work release instead of being 

incarcerated and that he showed extreme disregard of that leniency when, less 

than two weeks after being placed on work release, he removed his device and

abandoned it. 

[8] Turning to Johnson’s character, we note that the presentence investigation 

report (“PSI”) shows that thirty-four-year-old Johnson has a criminal history 

consisting of five juvenile adjudications and numerous adult convictions and 

arrests in both Indiana and Ohio. Johnson received his first juvenile 

adjudication for theft at age thirteen. His adult convictions include: (1) a 2008 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2249 | February 18, 2019 Page 5 of 6

felony breaking and entering conviction (Ohio); (2) a 2010 possessing criminal 

tools conviction (Ohio); (3) a 2010 Class C felony possession of a controlled 

substance within 1,000 feet of school property conviction (Indiana); (4) a 2010 

Class C felony forgery conviction (Indiana); (5) a 2012 obstructing official 

business conviction (Ohio); (6) a 2012 felony possession of heroin conviction 

(Ohio); (7) a 2013 felonious assault conviction (Ohio); (8) a 2018 Class A 

misdemeanor criminal trespass conviction (Indiana); (9) a 2018 Class A 

misdemeanor theft conviction (Indiana); (10) an additional 2018 Class A 

misdemeanor criminal trespass conviction (Indiana); and (11) a 2018 Class A 

misdemeanor invasion of privacy conviction (Indiana). As noted by the trial 

court, Johnson has also violated probation and community corrections. For 

example, Johnson was sentenced to three years on probation in community 

corrections for his 2008 felony breaking and entering conviction in Ohio, and 

he violated that community corrections on five separate occasions and had his 

probation terminated. He also violated his Ohio community correction 

placement from his possession of heroin conviction in 2012. Johnson’s

character reveals a disregard for the law and the authority of the courts. 

Johnson’s character is further revealed by his history of drug use. The PSI 

indicates that Johnson started using drugs and alcohol at age seventeen and that 

he had used methamphetamine on a daily basis prior to arrest in 2018. 

[9] Johnson has not persuaded us that his two-year sentence for Level 6 felony 

escape is inappropriate. Therefore, we affirm the sentence imposed by the trial 

court.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2249 | February 18, 2019 Page 6 of 6

[10] Affirmed.

Najam, J., and Altice, J., concur.