Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2709 | April 25, 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.

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT

Michael R. Fisher

Marion County Public Defender Agency

Indianapolis, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE

Curtis T. Hill, Jr.

Attorney General of Indiana

Samantha M. Sumcad

Deputy Attorney General

Indianapolis, Indiana

I N T H E

COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Ryan Scott,

Appellant-Defendant,

v.

State of Indiana,

Appellee-Plaintiff

April 25, 2019

Court of Appeals Case No.

18A-CR-2709

Appeal from the Marion Superior 

Court

The Honorable Sheila A. Carlisle, 

Judge

Trial Court Cause No.

49G03-1610-MR-40423

Baker, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2709 | April 25, 2019 Page 2 of 6

[1] Ryan Scott appeals the sentence imposed by the trial court after he was 

convicted of Felony Murder and Class A Misdemeanor Carrying a Handgun 

Without a License, arguing that the sentence is inappropriate in light of the 

nature of the offenses and his character. We affirm.

Facts

[2] On October 10, 2016, then-seventeen-year-old Lindsey Wyatt contacted her 

boyfriend, then-nineteen-year-old Scott, and another friend, Sierra Robinson. 

The threesome came up with a plan to get together that evening to “rob 

somebody for weed.” Tr. Vol. II p. 239. Wyatt had been communicating with 

Steven Hunter through Facebook Messenger about purchasing a large amount 

of marijuana. That evening, she contacted Hunter and arranged to meet him to 

buy an ounce of marijuana for $400. Wyatt, Scott, and Robinson planned to 

rob Hunter instead of buying the marijuana.

[3] Wyatt, Scott, and Robinson began driving to Hunter’s residence around 7:00 

p.m. in Robinson’s green Lincoln Navigator. Scott decided to bring a handgun 

that had been stolen from Wyatt’s stepfather. On the way to the drug buy, they 

stopped at a convenience store so that Scott could climb in the trunk to hide 

from Hunter. They planned that when Wyatt saw the marijuana, she would 

say, “[t]his seems about right,” id. at 87, at which point Scott would emerge 

from the trunk and rob Hunter.

[4] When they arrived at Hunter’s residence, Hunter got into the back seat of the 

Navigator and they drove down the street to complete the transaction. When 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2709 | April 25, 2019 Page 3 of 6

they stopped, Hunter began to weigh the marijuana on a scale. Wyatt then 

“said what [she was] supposed to say,” id., and Scott climbed out of the trunk, 

opened the rear passenger door where Hunter was sitting, and pointed the 

handgun at Hunter.

[5] Hunter attempted to grab the drugs he had handed to Wyatt and started 

struggling with Scott. Scott struck Hunter in the head with the gun and a single 

gunshot went off. Scott had shot Hunter in the neck and exclaimed, “Oh my 

God, I accidentally killed him.” Id. at 89.

[6] Scott pulled Hunter out of the vehicle and dragged him to the sidewalk. He 

took Hunter’s cell phone, climbed into the back seat of the Navigator, and told 

Robinson to drive away, leaving Hunter’s body on the side of the road. On the 

way back to Wyatt’s residence, Scott was “taking the bullets out of the gun and 

tearing the phone apart and throwing them out the window.” Tr. Vol. III p. 2. 

Scott asked Robinson to stop the vehicle on a bridge over the White River; 

Scott got out of the Navigator and threw the gun into the water.

[7] When they arrived back at Wyatt’s residence, they began to clean up the blood 

inside the Navigator, which also had a bullet hole in the windshield. After 

trying to clean up the evidence for a few hours, Scott took all of the cleaning 

rags and burned them in a gravel area nearby. Scott got back into the Navigator 

and drove away, returning twenty minutes later on a skateboard. 

[8] In the morning, someone called Wyatt’s father and told him that she had 

observed the threesome cleaning up the Navigator the night before. Wyatt’s 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2709 | April 25, 2019 Page 4 of 6

father called the police and then went to talk to his daughter. Ultimately, all

three were arrested. 

[9] On October 13, 2016, the State charged Scott with robbery resulting in serious 

bodily injury, carrying a handgun without a license, felony murder, and 

murder. Before trial, the State dismissed the robbery and murder charges. The 

jury trial took place on September 24-26, 2018, and at the conclusion of the 

trial, the jury found Scott guilty of the two remaining counts. On October 12, 

2018, the trial court sentenced Scott to concurrent terms of fifty-five years for 

felony murder and one year for carrying a handgun without a license. The last 

two years of the sentence may be served on community corrections. Scott now 

appeals.

Discussion and Decision

[10] Scott’s sole argument on appeal is that the sentence is inappropriate in light of 

the nature of the offenses and his character pursuant to Indiana Appellate Rule 

7(B). We must “conduct [this] review with substantial deference and give ‘due 

consideration’ to the trial court’s decision—since the ‘principal role of [our] 

review is to attempt to leaven the outliers,’ and not to achieve a perceived 

‘correct’ sentence . . . .” Knapp v. State, 9 N.E.3d 1274, 1292 (Ind. 2014) 

(quoting Chambers v. State, 989 N.E.2d 1257, 1259 (Ind. 2013)) (internal 

citations omitted).

[11] For felony murder, Scott faced a term of forty-five to sixty-five years, with an 

advisory sentence of fifty-five years. Ind. Code § 35-50-2-3. The trial court 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2709 | April 25, 2019 Page 5 of 6

imposed the advisory term and stated that the last two years of the sentence 

may be served on community corrections. For Class A misdemeanor carrying a 

handgun without a license, Scott faced a term of up to one year, I.C. § 35-50-3-

2; he received a one-year term, but it will be served concurrent with the other 

sentence. 

[12] With respect to the nature of the offenses, Scott and his friends hatched a 

premeditated plan to arrange a drug deal and rob the dealer. Scott decided to 

bring a handgun to the robbery. He remained hidden in the trunk for the first 

part of the encounter, emerging with his handgun to surprise the dealer. As 

they struggled over the drugs, Scott struck Hunter in the head while still holding 

the gun. As a result, the gun fired, hitting and killing Hunter. Afterwards, 

Scott took Hunter’s cell phone and directed Robinson to drive away, leaving 

Hunter’s body on the side of the road. 

[13] Scott attempts to shift primary responsibility for the plan and the crimes to 

Wyatt, but it is apparent that he was an active participant during the planning 

and execution of the robbery. He argues that this offense is not the worst of the 

worst with respect to felony murders because the murder itself was not 

intentional. That may be true, but the trial court recognized as much by 

imposing an advisory term and permitting two years of it to be served on 

community corrections. There is certainly nothing regarding the nature of the 

offenses that leads us to believe the only appropriate sentence would have been 

less than the advisory term.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-2709 | April 25, 2019 Page 6 of 6

[14] With respect to Scott’s character, at the young age of nineteen, he has a juvenile 

adjudication for possession of illegal drugs and, as an adult, has been arrested 

twice since 2015. He received an alternative misdemeanor conviction for 

criminal recklessness and was placed on probation. He violated probation, 

however, and it was revoked and he served time in jail as a result. 

Furthermore, after acting with the premeditation and deliberation described 

above, Scott spent hours trying to hide the crime and evade law enforcement. 

He cleaned the blood from the vehicle, drove the vehicle away and left it 

elsewhere, and burned the rest of the evidence. He stole and dismantled 

Hunter’s cell phone and threw the gun into the White River. And now, on 

appeal, he continues to try to evade responsibility, claiming that the primary 

bad actors were his accomplices. We do not find the sentence imposed by the 

trial court to be inappropriate in light of the nature of the offenses and Scott’s 

character.

[15] The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Najam, J., and Robb, J., concur.