GARRISON v. STATE (2025)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Case Summary

[1] Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, Joshua E. Garrison was convicted of strangulation and residential entry, both Level 6 felonies. On appeal, he contends that the four-year aggregate sentence imposed by the trial court was inappropriate in light of the nature of his offenses and his character.

[2] We affirm.

Facts & Procedural History

[3] On February 21, 2024, Garrison drove from North Vernon to the Columbus home of Meagan Plessinger, his ex-girlfriend. He knocked on her back door, and Plessinger stepped outside to speak with him. She believed he was there to apologize for an incident that had happened the previous day, but instead Garrison was angry and cursing at her. When he returned to his vehicle, Plessinger went back inside and to her bedroom to rest.

[4] About an hour later, Garrison entered through the front door of Plessinger's home without permission and walked into her bedroom. He then began cursing and calling her a liar. When Plessinger went to the dining room, Garrison grabbed her by the hair and threw her to the ground, where he punched her multiple times in the head and slapped her face.

[5] When she managed to get up, Plessinger tried to open a window to yell for help, but Garrison pulled her by the hair back to the ground. He threatened Plessinger, “I came here to end you, you're not going to breathe again and you'll be laying in the bathtub and I'm going to jail.” Appendix at 17. He also made other threats during the incident. Then at one point, he grabbed her by the throat. Plessinger had difficulty regaining her breath when he finally let go.

[6] Plessinger was eventually able to escape her home and get to her vehicle. She called the police after driving around the block. Garrison was apprehended driving away from Plessinger's home. Plessinger told responding officers that her pain was at a level eight. Officers observed injuries to her face, neck, and back of head.

[7] On February 22, 2024, the State charged Garrison with Level 5 felony criminal confinement, Level 6 felony strangulation, Level 6 felony intimidation, Level 6 felony residential entry, and Class A misdemeanor domestic battery. On September 9, 2024, Garrison entered into a plea agreement with the State, in which he pled guilty to strangulation and residential entry and the State dismissed the other charges. Sentencing was left open to the trial court's discretion. On October 8, 2024, the trial court sentenced Garrison to two and one-half years on the strangulation count and one and one-half years on the residential entry count. The sentences were ordered to be served consecutively for a total executed term of four years in the Department of Correction (DOC).

[8] Garrison now appeals and asks that we suspend the balance of his sentence and place him on probation through community corrections. Additional information will be provided below as needed.

Discussion & Decision

[9] Garrison seeks our independent review of the appropriateness of his sentence under Ind. Appellate Rule 7(B), which allows us to revise a sentence if “after due consideration of the trial court's decision” we find that “the sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and the character of the offender.” Id.; see also Hoak v. State, 113 N.E.3d 1209, 1209 (Ind. 2019) (“Even when a trial court imposes a sentence within its discretion, the Indiana Constitution authorizes independent appellate review and revision of this sentencing decision.”).

[10] Our principal task in this regard is “ ‘to attempt to leaven the outliers,’ not to achieve a ‘correct’ result in every case.” Hancz-Barron v. State, 235 N.E.3d 1237, 1248 (Ind. 2024) (quoting Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219, 1225 (Ind. 2008)). “And we generally defer to the sentence imposed unless a defendant presents ‘compelling evidence’ portraying the nature of the offense and their character in a positive light.” Id. (quoting Stephenson v. State, 29 N.E.3d 111, 122 (Ind. 2015)). Thus, Garrison bears the responsibility of persuading us that his sentence is inappropriate. See Robinson v. State, 91 N.E.3d 574, 577 (Ind. 2018).

[11] Garrison was sentenced to a total of four years in the DOC for two Level 6 felonies. The sentencing range for a Level 6 felony is six months to two and one-half years, with an advisory sentence of one year. I.C. § 35-50-2-7(b). Thus, Garrison received the maximum sentence for his strangulation conviction and slightly above the advisory for his residential entry conviction. The total sentence imposed was the maximum allowed, however, under the consecutive sentencing statute, which limits aggregate terms for felony convictions (except for statutorily defined crimes of violence) arising out of an episode of criminal conduct. See Ind. Code § 35-50-1-2(d)(1) (“If the most serious crime for which the defendant is sentenced is a Level 6 felony, the total of the consecutive terms of imprisonment may not exceed four (4) years.”).

[12] Regarding the nature of his offenses, Garrison argues that the facts underlying the residential entry conviction were “not particularly heinous” because he did not kick down the door. Appellant's Brief at 8. And he suggests that “[t]here was not anything extraordinary about the Strangulation offense.” Id. at 9. Garrison's arguments, however, ignore the entire picture. See Bethea v. State, 983 N.E.2d 1134, 1145 (Ind. 2013) (holding that courts may also consider facts underlying charges dismissed pursuant to plea agreement). He entered Plessinger's home, without permission, while she was sleeping and then violently attacked her by pulling her by the hair to the ground multiple times and punching, slapping, and strangling her. All the while, he was threatening Plessinger that he was there to end her life and that he planned to go to jail. We agree with the State that Garrison has not presented compelling evidence of restraint, regard, or lack of brutality in his actions that would render the sentence inappropriate.

[13] Garrison has also not shown that his character warrants a lesser sentence. As the trial court observed, Garrison's character is reflected in his extensive criminal history, which includes five prior felony convictions and seven misdemeanor convictions. This history spans more than twenty years and includes prior convictions for residential entry, criminal confinement with bodily injury, disorderly conduct, resisting law enforcement, and invasion of privacy. Further, Garrison has had probation revoked on three prior occasions. His history of offenses similar to those charged in this case demonstrates that prior chances at rehabilitation through community corrections and probation have not worked to reform him. Moreover, his behavior during presentence confinement in this case has been extremely poor, resulting in him receiving nine jail rule violations between March and September 2024 for such things as disorderly conduct, resisting staff, theft, and refusing to obey staff orders. In fact, he was on lockdown at the time of sentencing. Finally, we agree with the trial court's assessment that Garrison's guilty plea is entitled to minimal weight, as he received a substantial benefit from the plea agreement, including the dismissal of a Level 5 felony charge.

[14] In sum, Garrison has failed to present compelling evidence portraying the nature of his offenses or his character in a positive light. The four-year executed sentence imposed by the trial court is not inappropriate.

[15] Judgment affirmed.

Altice, Chief Judge.

Brown, J. and Tavitas, J., concur.