Doron Madison, Appellant-Defendant v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff (2026)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

[1] The Bartholomew Circuit Court revoked Doron Madison's probation and ordered him to serve 1,422 days of his previously suspended sentence. Madison appeals and argues that the trial court abused its discretion in imposing his sentence.

[2] We affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

[3] On July 29, 2023, Officer Tyler Boswell of the Columbus Police Department responded to a report of theft at a Walmart Supercenter. Officer Boswell met with Walmart's Loss Prevention team and reviewed Walmart's surveillance footage. The footage showed Doron Madison concealing items inside his backpack and then attempting to leave the store. Madison later admitted to Officer Boswell that he stole “some items from the store and that the items were in his backpack.” Appellee's Br. at 6. Officers searched Madison's backpack and found nine Walmart items with a combined worth of $115.95. Id. Also inside the backpack, an officer discovered a syringe, two paraphernalia devices with residue, and folded foil with either fentanyl or methamphetamine residue. Id.

[4] Law enforcement arrested Madison, and the State charged him with Level 6 felony unlawful possession of a syringe, Level 6 felony possession of methamphetamine, and Class A misdemeanor conversion. Appellant's App. Vol. 2, pp. 23-26. In April 2024, the parties reached a plea agreement. Madison pleaded guilty to all three charges, and the trial court ordered him to participate in the drug court program. The trial court withheld entry of judgment against Madison, noting that, if Madison successfully completed the program, the court would dismiss the charges.

[5] On October 4, 2024, the State filed its first notice of drug court violation and alleged that Madison had absconded from Wise Path sober living against treatment recommendations. On November 12, Madison began treatment at CRT Richmond. On November 19, Madison failed to appear for his weekly drug court hearing. Id. at 86. The court issued an arrest warrant. Two days later, the State filed an amended notice of drug court violation and alleged that Madison had absconded from treatment recommendations and had tested positive for buprenorphine at CRT Richmond on November 15. On November 24, Madison voluntarily checked himself into Hickory Treatment Center.

[6] On February 4, 2025, the trial court sanctioned Madison and ordered him to complete two hours of community service for his drug court violations. Six days later, the State filed a second amended complaint alleging that Madison had absconded against the CRT Whitney's treatment recommendation on February 9, 2025.¹ On June 10, 2025, Madison admitted to all drug court allegations against him. He also requested to voluntarily withdraw from the drug court program. See Id. at 109. The trial court granted Madison's request and terminated him from the program. The court then entered judgment of conviction against Madison for Level 6 felony unlawful possession of a syringe, Level 6 felony possession of methamphetamine, and Class A misdemeanor conversion.

[7] On August 11, 2025, the trial court sentenced Madison to 912 days for Count I,² 730 days for Count II, and 360 days for Count III. Id. at 129-31. The trial court suspended the sentences imposed on Counts I and II but ordered them to be served consecutively. The sentence imposed for Count III amounted to time served and ran concurrently with Count I's sentence. Id. at 127. The trial court placed Madison on probation, and, as a condition of his probation, the court ordered Madison to comply with and successfully complete the Chain Breakers program. Id. at 130.

[8] Madison's intake assessment for probation was completed on August 14, 2025. Tr. Vol. 2, pp. 20-21. Two weeks later, Madison absconded from the Chain Breakers program. Id. at 14, 21. Specifically, Madison had been given permission to travel to the Marion County Probation Department to set up his probation in another case. While at the probation department, Madison asked to use the restroom and never returned. Id. at 21. Madison later admitted that he had seen someone with whom he had previously used drugs and “ran off to get high with them.” Id. at 24. The State then filed a petition to revoke Madison's probation alleging that Madison had violated the conditions for multiple reasons: (1) failing to complete the Chain Breakers program, (2) failing to report to community corrections after leaving the program, and (3) not paying his fines and fees as directed by the court.

[9] In October 2025, police arrested Madison for possession of synthetic marijuana and for providing a false identity to law enforcement. The State filed an amended petition to revoke Madison's probation adding that Madison had violated the conditions of his probation with these two new crimes. His revocation hearing took place on March 9, 2026. Madison admitted to violating the conditions of his probation by not completing the Chain Breakers program, failing to report to his probation officer after leaving the program, being arrested for falsely identifying himself, and having contraband on him when he was arrested. At his request, Madison was evaluated by Bartholomew County's Recovery Enables a Life for Men (“REALM”) program. Madison qualified for the program and the Bartholomew County Corrections Department recommended Madison be placed in and complete the REALM program. Id. at 21.

[10] On April 9, 2026, the trial court revoked Madison's probation. The court denied his request for placement in the REALM program and ordered him to serve his previously suspended sentence of 1,422 days.

[11] Madison now appeals.

The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it ordered Madison to serve his previously suspended 1,422-day sentence.

[12] 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. Bennett v. State, 119 N.E.3d 1057, 1058 (Ind. 2019).

[13] Madison contends the trial court abused its discretion by revoking his probation and ordering Madison to serve the “entirety of his suspended sentence.” Appellant's Br. at 4. More specifically, Madison argues that the trial court abused its discretion because he accepted responsibility for his actions and was prepared to rehabilitate himself and address his underlying drug dependency issues by being placed in the REALM program. Id. We are not persuaded by Madison's arguments.

[14] Our court has recognized that revocation may be warranted when a defendant continues to violate his probation after being “shown considerable leniency and given multiple opportunities to address his addiction.” Overstreet v. State, 136 N.E.3d 260, 264 (Ind. Ct. App. 2019), trans. denied. The trial court here reviewed Madison's prior criminal history and his multiple rehabilitation opportunities. Madison's criminal history includes sixteen separate offenses. Appellant's App. Vol. 2, pp. 119-22. Of those sixteen offenses, eleven offenses involved alcohol intoxication or drug possession. Id. Moreover, trial courts have graciously placed Madison in at least six different treatment programs to give him the opportunity to address his substance abuse issues. Appellee's Br. at 13.

[15] But Madison has displayed a lack of effort in all of the rehabilitative programs that he has attempted. He has failed to report to his probation officer; he has absconded numerous times from treatment programs; he has run off with people he once used drugs with; and he has lied to the police about his identity. Tr. Vol. 2, p. 27. The trial court acknowledged the apparent sincerity of Madison's statements about wanting to participate in treatment, but we echo the trial court's admonition that Madison's words “have to be followed by actions.” Id. Simply said, we agree with the State that Madison has repeatedly failed to take “meaningful advantage of the rehabilitation opportunities.” See Appellee's Br. at 13. We commend Madison for admitting to each of his violations without hesitation. But the trial court still has the ultimate discretion in imposing part or all of his suspended sentence. And because the trial court is within its discretion to “order execution of all” of Madison's remaining sentence, the trial court did not abuse its discretion here. See I.C. § 35-38-2-3(h).

Conclusion

[16] In sum, we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by revoking Madison's probation. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's order that Madison serve the entirety of his previously suspended sentence.

[17] Affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Neither party specifies when Madison officially began treatment at the CRT Whitney Treatment facility.

2.   Madison was given credit for 220 days toward his 912-day sentence, and the balance of the sentence was suspended. Appellant's App. Vol. 2, p. 130.

Mathias, Judge.

Pyle, J., and Weissmann, J., concur.