CRESGY v. STATE (2025)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Case Summary

[1] Eric L. Cresgy appeals the trial court's sanction following the revocation of his placement on probation. Cresgy presents a single issue for our review, namely, whether the trial court abused its discretion when it ordered him to serve the balance of his previously suspended sentence in the Department of Correction (“DOC”). We affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

[2] On May 30, 2023, the State charged Cresgy with possession of methamphetamine, as a Level 5 felony; maintaining a common nuisance, as a Level 6 felony; and possession of paraphernalia, as a Class A misdemeanor. Thereafter, on May 2, 2024, the parties entered into a plea agreement pursuant to which Cresgy agreed to plead guilty to the possession of methamphetamine charge in exchange for the State's dismissal of the other charges. The parties also agreed to a sentence of four years and four days, with four years suspended to probation. The court accepted the guilty plea, entered judgment of conviction accordingly, and sentenced Cresgy pursuant to the terms of the plea. On August 12, the court entered its order of probation and ordered Cresgy, in relevant part, to not commit another criminal offense, to report to probation as directed, and to not use any controlled substance.

[3] On November 14, Cresgy admitted to his probation officer that he had used methamphetamine two days prior. The probation department then filed a notice of violation alleging that Cresgy had violated the terms of his probation when he used methamphetamine and when he failed to comply with a counseling requirement. Based on that report, the State filed a motion to revoke Cresgy's probation. On November 22, the State filed a second motion to revoke Cresgy's probation. In that motion, the State additionally alleged that Cresgy had violated his probation when he failed to report on four occasions between November 19 and November 22.

[4] On April 1, 2025, Cresgy admitted to having violated the terms of his probation by “admitting to using an illegal substance (methamphetamine)” and by “failing to report to probation” as directed. Appellant's App. Vol. 2 at 108. The court accepted Cresgy's admission. Then, following a hearing, the court found that Cresgy “has a significant history of criminal or delinquent behavior,” that he had recently violated the conditions of probation, and that prior lenient treatment by the court “has not deterred criminal behavior.” Id. at 119-20. The court also considered that Cresgy had admitted to the violations. The court then revoked Cresgy's placement on probation and ordered him to serve the balance of his previously suspended sentence in the DOC. This appeal ensued.

Discussion and Decision

[5] Cresgy appeals the trial court's order that he serve the balance of his previously suspended sentence in the DOC. Probation is a matter of grace left to trial court discretion. Murdock v. State, 10 N.E.3d 1265, 1267 (Ind. 2014). Upon finding that a defendant has violated a condition of his probation, the trial court may “[o]rder execution of all or part of the sentence that was suspended at the time of initial sentencing.” Ind. Code § 35-38-2-3(h)(3). “We review a trial court's sentencing decision in probation revocation proceedings for an abuse of discretion.” Cox v. State, 850 N.E.2d 485, 489 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006). An abuse of discretion occurs “only where the trial court's decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances” before the court. Robinson v. State, 91 N.E.3d 574, 577 (Ind. 2018) (per curiam). We will not reweigh the evidence or reconsider witness credibility. Griffith v. State, 788 N.E.2d 835, 839-40 (Ind. 2003). Rather, we consider only the evidence most favorable to the trial court's judgment to determine if there was substantial evidence of probative value to support the court's ruling. Id.

[6] On appeal, Cresgy contends that the court abused its discretion when it ordered him to serve the balance of his sentence in the DOC because he had made “some efforts to rehabilitate himself” prior to the probation violations and that, after the notice of violation was filed, he completed a “partial hospitalization program” and then an “intensive outpatient program[.]” Appellant's Br. at 9. He also maintains that he “was beginning the process of arranging for a sponsor,” that he had a “diagnosed mental health disorder,” and that he “was honest about his methamphetamine use[.]” Id. at 9-10.

[7] However, the record indicates that Cresgy has a history of criminal behavior that includes five misdemeanor convictions and two felony convictions. In addition, Cresgy has been placed on probation three prior times, with one closed out satisfactorily and two closed out unsatisfactorily. But despite those prior attempts at leniency, Cresgy nonetheless continues to violate the terms of his probation by using methamphetamine, which is what caused his placement on probation to begin with, and by failing to report to probation on four occasions. Based on Cresgy's past failed attempts at probation and his current probation violations, it was well within the court's discretion to order Cresgy to serve the balance of his sentence in the DOC. We therefore affirm the court's judgment.

[8] Affirmed.

Bailey, Judge.

Tavitas, J., and Kenworthy, J., concur.