Tryricko Bolian, Appellant-Defendant v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff (2026)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Case Summary

[1] Tryricko Bolian appeals the ten-year sentence imposed by the trial court following his guilty plea to child molesting as a Level 4 felony. He contends that this sentence, which was the maximum permitted by the terms of his plea agreement, is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and his character.

[2] We affirm.

Facts & Procedural History

[3] Bolian's victim (Victim) is his biological daughter. Between January 2016 and December 2018, when Victim was ten to twelve years old, Bolian repeatedly molested her in the family home. Victim disclosed the abuse at school to a friend and then to a school counselor sometime in 2019. Victim was immediately taken into protective custody by the Indiana Department of Child Services and then placed in the care of her uncle.

[4] During a sexual assault examination, Victim described to the forensic nurse that Bolian had, since the time she was in fifth grade, placed his mouth and hands on her breasts and vagina, penetrated her vagina with his penis, and penetrated her anus with his penis and a toy. Victim also reported that Bolian made her touch his penis with her hands.

[5] Victim recounted these incidents again to her mental health counselor and at a forensic interview. She estimated that this abuse occurred between five and ten separate times over the years, and she noted that certain acts caused her pain. Bolian would bear hug her into submission whenever she resisted, and he would instruct her not to tell anyone. Further, he did not use protection when having sexual intercourse with her. On the last occasion, just before Christmas 2018, Victim cried as Bolian inserted his penis into her vagina and she tried to hit him with her elbows, pleading with him to stop, which he eventually did.

[6] On March 17, 2020, the State charged Bolian with three counts of child molesting: Count I, as a Level 1 felony; Count II, as a Level 3 felony; and Count III, as a Level 4 felony. The first two were based on sexual intercourse or other sexual conduct, and the last was based on fondling or touching. A warrant was issued for Bolian's arrest that same day, but he was not arrested until February 12, 2021. About four months later, after posting bond, Bolian was released on GPS monitoring. Thereafter, seven jury trial dates were canceled by agreement of the parties, with a final trial setting of February 6, 2025.

[7] On February 5, 2025, the State and Bolian entered into a plea agreement. Bolian agreed to plead guilty to Count III in exchange for the dismissal of Counts I and II and a sentencing cap of ten years. The agreement provided that the parties were otherwise “free to fully argue their respective positions as to the sentence to be imposed by the Court[.]” Appendix at 28. At the sentencing hearing on July 31, 2025, the trial court accepted the plea, which it had previously taken under advisement, and sentenced Bolian to ten years in the Department of Correction (DOC).

[8] Bolian now appeals, asking us to revise his sentence to eight years with six years executed in the DOC and two years suspended to probation. Additional information will be provided below as needed.

Discussion & Decision

[9] Bolian 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, Bolian bears the responsibility of persuading us that his sentence is inappropriate. See Robinson v. State, 91 N.E.3d 574, 577 (Ind. 2018).

[11] The sentencing range for a Level 4 felony is two to twelve years, with an advisory sentence of six years. Ind. Code § 35-50-2-5.5. Pursuant to his plea agreement, Bolian's potential sentence was capped at ten years, which is the sentence that the trial court ultimately imposed.

[12] As we have observed:

“[A] defendant's conscious choice to enter a plea agreement that limits the trial court's discretion to a sentence less than the statutory maximum should usually be understood as strong and persuasive evidence of sentence reasonableness and appropriateness” and appellate relief should be granted “only in the most rare, exceptional cases.”

Merriweather v. State, 151 N.E.3d 1281, 1286 n.2 (Ind. Ct. App. 2020) (quoting Childress v. State, 848 N.E.2d 1073, 1081 (Ind. 2006) (Dickson, J., concurring)). Bolian's is not a rare or exceptional case, and revision of his sentence on appeal would be entirely inappropriate under the circumstances.

[13] Here, Bolian molested his own daughter many times over a period of two years, beginning when she was ten years old. His actions went far beyond touching or fondling,¹ and he did not stop even when Victim resisted and cried. In addition to psychological trauma, Bolian caused Victim physical pain when he performed sexual intercourse and other sexual conduct on her. And Victim described at sentencing that the only time she “felt safe from him” was when she had company over or stayed overnight at a family member's home. Transcript at 18. The abuse stopped only because Victim summoned the courage, with the encouragement of a friend, to tell a school counselor. Nothing about the nature of Bolian's pattern of repeated sexual abuse of his young daughter warrants a lesser sentence.

[14] Bolian's character is also not deserving of a reduced sentence. His criminal history consists of three prior felony and seven prior misdemeanor convictions, along with many other contacts with law enforcement. His criminal behavior spans decades, beginning in 1992, and includes violent offenses such as aggravated battery with a firearm and armed robbery, among others. Bolian attempts to minimize this history by noting that he had no violations during the four years that he was on pretrial release in this case and that he has not committed a crime since this one in 2018. We are not persuaded that behaving well while being closely monitored by GPS and facing serious felony charges equates to virtuous character. Bolian's criminal history is serious and substantially aggravating.

[15] Bolian's poor character is also reflected in the violation of his sacred position of trust as Victim's father and in his failure to express true remorse for his reprehensible actions. At sentencing, he simply apologized to Victim “for the things that occurred to her.” Transcript at 36. And during his presentence interview with the probation officer, Bolian stated that he did not “claim” Victim as his daughter anymore and denied that he committed the instant offense (later acknowledging his guilt again at the sentencing hearing). Appendix at 41. Further, Bolian's guilty plea was not altruistic; it was pragmatic, coming many years after being charged and benefiting him greatly with dismissal of the most serious charges and a favorable sentencing cap.

[16] In sum, the ten-year sentence imposed in this case was not inappropriate considering the nature of the offense and Bolian's character. Accordingly, we reject the invitation to revise it.

[17] Judgment affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

1.   In considering the nature of the offense, we are not limited to considering only the facts contained in the stipulated factual basis regarding the count to which a defendant pled guilty under a negotiated plea agreement. Cf. Bethea v. State, 983 N.E.2d 1134, 1144 (Ind. 2013) (where plea agreement capped sentence but did not limit what evidence could be considered in sentencing, court could consider as aggravating the facts related to the dismissed charges). Here, the probable cause affidavit was attached to the presentence investigation report and addressed by the State at the sentencing hearing. Neither we nor a trial court are required to turn a blind eye to such information when considering a defendant's sentence under these circumstances.

Altice, Judge.

Brown, J., and DeBoer, J., concur.