Jakob Chance Scott, Appellant-Defendant v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff (2025)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

[1] Jakob Chance Scott appeals his sentence after he pleaded guilty, pursuant to a written plea agreement, to Level 1 felony neglect of a dependent. But, in his written plea agreement, Scott expressly waived the right to appellate review of any sentence the trial court imposed that was within the terms of his agreement, which he received. Appellant's App. Vol. 2, p. 103.

[2] In his attempt to avoid his waiver, Scott argues that we should consider his appellate arguments because, at his change-of-plea hearing, the trial court incorrectly stated that he had reserved the right to appellate review of his sentence. The Indiana Supreme Court has expressly rejected that proposition. Davis v. State, 217 N.E.3d 1229, 1232-34 (Ind. 2023). And, instead of attempting to distinguish Davis in some way on appeal, Scott instead ignores it and relies on irrelevant pre-Davis authority. Further, once the State raised the waiver issue in its brief, Scott did not file a Reply Brief to challenge the State's assessment.

[3] We conclude that Davis controls and that Scott's appeal is not properly before us. We therefore dismiss his appeal. If Scott believes his guilty plea was not knowingly and voluntarily made, his remedy is in the post-conviction process. See id. at 1232.

[4] Dismissed.

Mathias, Judge.

Judges Vaidik and Pyle concur. Vaidik, J., and Pyle, J., concur.