Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 34A02

- 1707

- CR

- 1601 | D e c e m b e r 1 5 , 2 0 1 7 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.

A TTORNEY FOR A PPELLANT Donald E.C. Leicht Kokomo, Indiana A TTORNEY S FOR A PPELLEE 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 Ca se No. 34A02

- 1707

- CR

- 1601 Appeal from the Howard Circuit Court The Honorable Lynn Murray, Judge Trial Co urt Cause No. 34C01

- 1609

- F1

- 217

Altice , Judge
. Case SummaryCourt of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 34A02

- 1707

- CR

- 1601 | D e c e m b e r 1 5 , 2 0 1 7 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 yea r s 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 handgu n 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 threatene d 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 be fore, but Bolden continued the assault and penetrated K.P.’s vagina with his penis. Bolden also fondled and placed his mouth on oneCourt of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 34A02

- 1707

- CR

- 1601 | D e c e m b e r 1 5 , 2 0 1 7 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 arrest ed 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 ple a d 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

serve d 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 theCourt of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 34A02

- 1707

- CR

- 1601 | D e c e m b e r 1 5 , 2 0 1 7 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 persuadin g us that his sentence is inappropriate. See id

.

[7] Bolden acknowledges that there is no wa y to minimize his rape of a sixteen

year - old girl, that he has a history of substance abuse, and that he has a problem with authority. Bolden argues, however, that “t here 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] Judgm ent affirmed.

M a y, J. and Vaidik, C. J., concur.