Norman Anderson, Appellant-Defendant v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff (2026)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Case Summary

[1] In 2025, Norman Anderson was convicted of Level 2 felony dealing in cocaine and found to be a habitual offender. The trial court sentenced him to forty-five years in the Indiana Department of Correction (DOC). He now appeals his sentence, arguing it is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and his character. We affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

[2] In February 2021, officers with the Anderson Police Department were dispatched to a gas station on a report of a “suspicious vehicle[.]” Tr. Vol. III p. 53. Officers approached the vehicle and saw Anderson in the driver's seat and a white powdery substance on the center console. Officers searched the vehicle and found seven plastic baggies containing powder, as well as additional plastic baggies and digital scales. Later testing revealed the baggies contained 30.61 grams of cocaine. Officers searched Anderson's person and found over three thousand dollars in cash. The State charged Anderson with Level 2 felony dealing in cocaine and two counts of Class A misdemeanor possession of a controlled substance. The State also alleged Anderson was a habitual offender.

[3] A bifurcated jury trial was held in June 2025. Prior to trial, the State dismissed the two misdemeanor counts. The jury found Anderson guilty of Level 2 felony dealing in cocaine and of being a habitual offender. A sentencing hearing was held in July. The court found the following aggravating factors: (1) Anderson's “thirty-six year ․ fairly uninterrupted” criminal history, consisting of nineteen prior felonies and twenty-two misdemeanors, (2) that Anderson was charged with multiple counts, and (3) that he was on probation at the time of the offense. The court found no mitigators and sentenced Anderson to twenty-seven years for the Level 2 felony, enhanced by eighteen years for being a habitual offender, for an aggregate sentence of forty-five years executed in the DOC. Anderson now appeals.

Discussion and Decision

[4] Anderson argues his forty-five-year sentence in the DOC is inappropriate. Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B) permits an appellate court to 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.” We give “considerable deference” to the trial court's sentencing decision and attempt only to “leaven the outliers” rather than achieve the “perceived ‘correct’ result” in every case. Lane v. State, 232 N.E.3d 119, 122 (Ind. 2024) (quoting Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219, 1222, 1225 (Ind. 2008)).

Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B) is a rare avenue for appellate relief that is reserved for exceptional cases. Even with Rule 7(B), sentencing is principally a discretionary function in which the trial court's judgment should receive considerable deference. Such deference should prevail unless overcome by compelling evidence portraying in a positive light the nature of the offense (such as accompanied by restraint, regard, and lack of brutality) and the defendant's character (such as substantial virtuous traits or persistent examples of good character). Absent such a sufficiently compelling evidentiary basis, we will not override the decision of ․ the trial court.

Sorenson v. State, 133 N.E.3d 717, 728 (Ind. Ct. App. 2019) (citations, quotations, and brackets omitted), trans. denied.

[5] A Level 2 felony carries a sentencing range of between ten and thirty years, with an advisory sentence of seventeen-and-a-half years. Ind. Code § 35-50-2-4.5 (2014). With an underlying Level 2 felony conviction, a habitual offender adjudication carries a sentencing range of between six and twenty years. Ind. Code § 35-50-2-8(i)(1) (2017).¹ Anderson was sentenced to twenty-seven years for the Level 2 felony, enhanced by eighteen years for being a habitual offender, for an aggregate sentence of forty-five years.

[6] Regarding the nature of the offense, we note Anderson was found with over thirty grams of cocaine, which is three times the amount required for his conviction. See Ind. Code § 35-48-4-1(e)(1) (2025).² And “distributing or possessing even small amounts of drugs threatens society.” State v. Timbs, 169 N.E.3d 361, 373 (Ind. 2021).

[7] As to Anderson's character, he emphasizes his lifelong substance-abuse issues and argues this minimizes his culpability. Notably, sixty-year-old Anderson reported using illegal substances since the age of fourteen. According to his presentence investigation report, he reported completing substance-abuse treatment only once in forty-five years. See App. Vol. II p. 94. We cannot say his drug addiction renders his sentence inappropriate where he has failed to meaningfully seek help for his addiction. See Hollins v. State, 145 N.E.3d 847, 854 (Ind. Ct. App. 2020) (declining to revise defendant's sentence due to his drug addiction where he did not seek assistance to address his addiction), trans. denied. Furthermore, his criminal history is egregious, consisting of nineteen felonies and twenty-two misdemeanors. He also was on probation when he committed this offense. This reflects poorly on his character and warrants an enhanced sentence.

[8] Anderson has not shown that his sentence is inappropriate under Appellate Rule 7(B).

[9] Affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

1.   In 2023, Indiana Code section 35-50-2-8(i)(1) was amended to reflect that, with an underlying Level 2 felony conviction, a habitual offender adjudication carries a sentencing range of between eight and twenty years. However, we cite to the pre-amendment statute here, as it is well settled that the sentencing statutes in effect at the time a defendant committed the offense govern the defendant's sentence. Marley v. State, 17 N.E.3d 335, 340 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014).

2.   Indiana Code section 35-48-4-1 was amended effective July 1, 2025. The relevant portions of the statute remain unchanged.

Scheele, Judge.

Bailey, J., and Vaidik, J., concur.