Nathan Baldwin, Appellant-Defendant v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff (2026)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Case Summary

[1] Nathan Baldwin appeals the sanction imposed by the trial court for his violation of probation. We affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

[2] In 2018, Baldwin was charged with 15 counts related to drugs and guns in Scott County. Baldwin and the State entered into a plea agreement under which Baldwin pled guilty to two counts (Level 3 felony dealing in cocaine and Class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license), the State dismissed the remaining counts, and Baldwin was sentenced to 12 years, with 8 years in the Department of Correction (DOC) and 4 years suspended to probation. While in prison, Baldwin completed Recovery While Incarcerated.

[3] In December 2022, Baldwin was released to probation, which was set to end in November 2026. Baldwin's probation conditions prohibited him from committing new offenses, possessing or using firearms, and possessing or using drugs. While on probation, Baldwin's probation officer offered various resources to help him maintain his sobriety, but he did not take advantage of them.

[4] In March 2024, Baldwin was arrested and charged with 21 drug-related offenses (20 felonies and 1 misdemeanor) in Clark County. See Cause No. 10C02-2403-F2-3 (“F2-3”). He was released from custody and ordered to appear in May, but he failed to appear, and a warrant was issued for his arrest. In July, before the warrant had been served, police in Clark County conducted a traffic stop of a car in which Baldwin was a passenger, and Baldwin was found with approximately 55 grams of methamphetamine and a handgun. Baldwin was arrested and charged with seven felony drug offenses. See Cause No. 10C02-2407-F3-16 (“F3-16”).

[5] The State petitioned to revoke Baldwin's probation in the Scott County case based on the offenses in the Clark County cases. A fact-finding hearing was held in October 2025. At that time, the Clark County cases were still pending. The State presented evidence only as to F3-16. See Appellant's App. Vol. 3 p. 92. The trial court found that Baldwin violated his probation by committing the offenses in F3-16. See id. at 30. At the December sanctions hearing, Baldwin's attorney noted that Baldwin was likely facing a “lengthy” sentence in the Clark County cases and asked the court to order him to serve his suspended time on home detention on the “back end” of the sentences he will receive in F2-3 and F3-16.¹ Tr. p. 33. The trial court found that Baldwin has a “lengthy criminal history” consisting mostly of drug convictions, that he violated his probation by committing offenses similar to the ones he was on probation for, that he had a “large amount[ ]” of methamphetamine, that he had not taken full advantage of the multiple rehabilitation opportunities he had been given, and that he committed the probation violation in this case while he was on pretrial release in F2-3. Id. The court ordered Baldwin to serve all four years of his suspended sentence in the DOC, to be served consecutive to the sentences he will receive in F2-3 and F3-16. The court said it would consider a sentence modification if Baldwin completes another drug program in the DOC.

[6] Baldwin now appeals.

Discussion and Decision

[7] Baldwin contends that the trial court erred in ordering him to serve his four-year suspended sentence in the DOC for violating his probation. Trial courts enjoy broad discretion in determining the appropriate sanction for probation violations, and we review only for an abuse of that discretion. Prewitt v. State, 878 N.E.2d 184, 188 (Ind. 2007).

[8] Baldwin claims that the trial court should have sentenced him to a “less restrictive and more rehabilitative option,” such as intensive inpatient treatment, because he is “a good candidate for community supervision.” Appellant's Br. p. 9. The record refutes that claim. The trial court found that Baldwin violated his probation based on the July 2024 event: while on probation, Baldwin was stopped and found with approximately 55 grams of methamphetamine and a handgun, conduct that produced seven felony drug charges in F3-16. In selecting the sanction for that violation, the trial court considered Baldwin's broader record, which forecloses his claim to leniency. Baldwin has a lengthy criminal history consisting mostly of drug convictions; he was already facing 21 drug-related charges in F2-3, in which he had failed to appear; and he has not been denied the chance to rehabilitate—he completed Recovery While Incarcerated and was offered resources by his probation officer to maintain his sobriety, but he did not take advantage of them. On this record, the trial court's decision to order Baldwin to serve his four-year suspended sentence in the DOC was not an abuse of discretion, especially in light of the court's statement that it would consider a sentence modification if Baldwin completes another drug program in the DOC.

[9] Affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

1.   In May 2026, Baldwin pled guilty to five counts in F2-3 and one count in F3-16. He is scheduled to be sentenced in both cases on July 23, 2026.

Vaidik, Judge.

Altice, J., and Foley, J., concur.