Leotis A. Williams, Appellant-Defendant v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff (2026)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

[1] Leotis A. Williams pled guilty to Level 6 felony operating while intoxicated (OWI) and admitted being a habitual vehicular substance offender (HVSO). The trial court sentenced him to four-and-a-half years on home detention—one-and-a-half years plus three years for the HVSO enhancement.

[2] Williams now appeals, asking us to reduce his sentence under Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B), which provides that an appellate court “may revise a sentence authorized by statute if, after due consideration of the trial court's decision, the court finds that the sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and the character of the offender.” The court's role under Rule 7(B) is to “leaven the outliers,” and “we reserve our 7(B) authority for exceptional cases.” Faith v. State, 131 N.E.3d 158, 160 (Ind. 2019). “Whether a sentence is inappropriate ultimately turns on the culpability of the defendant, the severity of the crime, the damage done to others, and a myriad of other factors that come to light in a given case.” Thompson v. State, 5 N.E.3d 383, 391 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (citing Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219, 1224 (Ind. 2008)). Because we generally defer to the judgment of trial courts in sentencing matters, defendants must persuade us that their sentences are inappropriate. Schaaf v. State, 54 N.E.3d 1041, 1044-45 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016).

[3] Regarding the nature of the offense, Williams notes that he “caused no accident, injured no person, and damaged no property.” Appellant's Br. p. 13. As for his character, Williams points to his acceptance of responsibility by pleading guilty, his good behavior while on pretrial release, and his claims at the sentencing hearing that he had been sober for three years before this arrest, that he had completed a substance-abuse program in the past, and that he was working two jobs. Despite these circumstances, three facts lead us to affirm Williams's sentence.

[4] First, Williams's criminal history is extensive. The presentence investigation report indicates that he has 28 prior convictions (seven felonies and 21 misdemeanors), including three for OWI. Second, Williams's sentence of four-and-a-half years is less than half of what he could have received. The maximum sentence for a Level 6 felony is two-and-a-half years, Ind. Code § 35-50-2-7(b), and the maximum HVSO enhancement is eight years, I.C. § 9-30-15.5-2(d), meaning Williams faced up to 10.5 years. And third, the trial court could have sent Williams to the Department of Correction but instead allowed him to serve his sentence on home detention. Williams has not persuaded us that his sentence is inappropriate.

[5] Affirmed.

Vaidik, Judge.

Tavitas, C.J., and May, J., concur.