Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 34A02-1707-CR-1601 | December 15, 2017 Page 1 of 4

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

Donald E.C. Leicht

Kokomo, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE

Curtis T. Hill, Jr.

Attorney General of Indiana

Lee M. Stoy, Jr.

Deputy Attorney General

Indianapolis, Indiana

I N T H E

COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Jaylen Bolden,

Appellant-Defendant,

v.

State of Indiana,

Appellee-Plaintiff

December 15, 2017

Court of Appeals Case No.

34A02-1707-CR-1601

Appeal from the Howard Circuit 

Court

The Honorable Lynn Murray, 

Judge

Trial Court Cause No.

34C01-1609-F1-217

Altice, Judge.

Case Summary
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 34A02-1707-CR-1601 | December 15, 2017 Page 2 of 4

[1] Jaylen Bolden pled guilty to rape as a Level 1 felony and was subsequently 

sentenced to forty years, with thirty years executed and ten years suspended to 

supervised probation. On appeal, Bolden argues that his sentence is 

inappropriate.

[2] We affirm.

Facts & Procedural History

[3] On May 12, 2016, Bolden engaged in a series of burglaries. During one of the 

burglaries, sixteen-year-old K.P. was home alone. K.P. went to bed around 

2:00 a.m. and was awakened around 4:02 a.m. when her bedroom door 

opened. K.P. saw an individual, later identified as Bolden through DNA 

evidence, wearing a black hooded sweatshirt, black sweatpants, and a ski mask. 

Bolden pointed a silver handgun at K.P. and ordered her to give him money. 

K.P. responded that she did not have any money. Bolden then order K.P. to 

“get down” and “suck him.” Appellant’s Appendix Vol. 2 at 34. K.P. refused, but 

Bolden then put the gun to her forehead and threatened to shoot her if she did 

not “suck him.” Id. 

[4] K.P. began performing oral sex on Bolden and, after a short time, Bolden 

ordered her to remove her pants and lie on the bed. Bolden then approached 

her and again pointed the handgun at her, telling her he would shoot her. 

Bolden inserted the barrel of the gun into K.P.’s vagina. K.P. told Bolden that 

she had never had sex before, but Bolden continued the assault and penetrated 

K.P.’s vagina with his penis. Bolden also fondled and placed his mouth on one 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 34A02-1707-CR-1601 | December 15, 2017 Page 3 of 4

of K.P.’s breasts. After a couple of minutes, Bolden dropped his gun. He got 

off of K.P. to search for his gun. After he found his gun, he left the room and 

looked through the other bedrooms. Bolden eventually left to continue his 

crime spree, and K.P. got dressed. K.P. was crying the entire time and was 

surprised the neighbors did not hear her screams. Bolden was arrested that 

same day during another burglary.

[5] On April 27, 2017, Bolden entered into a plea agreement with the State, 

pursuant to which Bolden agreed to plead guilty to rape as a Level 1 felony and 

the State agreed to a cap on executed time of thirty years and to dismiss other 

pending charges, both in this cause and in four other causes. A sentencing 

hearing was held on July 5, 2017, at the conclusion of which the trial court 

sentenced Bolden to forty years, with thirty years executed and ten years to be 

served on supervised probation. Bolden now appeals. Additional facts will be 

provided as necessary.

Discussion & Decision

[6] Bolden argues that his sentence is inappropriate. Article 7, section 4 of the 

Indiana Constitution grants our Supreme Court the power to review and revise 

criminal sentences. See Knapp v. State, 9 N.E.3d 1274, 1292 (Ind. 2014), cert. 

denied, 135 S.Ct. 978 (2015). Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 7, the Supreme 

Court authorized this court to perform the same task. Cardwell v. State, 895 

N.E.2d 1219, 1224 (Ind. 2008). Per App. R. 7(B), we may revise a sentence “if 

after due consideration of the trial court’s decision, the Court finds that the 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 34A02-1707-CR-1601 | December 15, 2017 Page 4 of 4

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

of the offender.” Inman v. State, 4 N.E.3d 190, 203 (Ind. 2014) (quoting App. R. 

7). “Sentencing review under Appellate Rule 7(B) is very deferential to the trial 

court.” Conley v. State, 972 N.E.2d 864, 876 (Ind. 2012). Bolden bears the 

burden on appeal of persuading us that his sentence is inappropriate. See id.

[7] Bolden acknowledges that there is no way to minimize his rape of a sixteenyear-old girl, that he has a history of substance abuse, and that he has a problem 

with authority. Bolden argues, however, that “there is nothing to be learned in 

thirty (30) years’ incarceration that cannot be learned in twenty (20) years’ 

incarceration.” Appellant’s Brief at 8. Bolden has wholly failed to meet his 

burden of persuading us that his sentence is inappropriate.

[8] Judgment affirmed.

May, J. and Vaidik, C. J., concur.