What do you take into consideration when considering more lenient versus stricter sentencing?

When weighing a sentence in Indiana, I use statutory guidelines to balance accountability with fairness. For stricter penalties, I look closely at criminal history, offenses committed while on supervision, victim vulnerability, severe harm, and aggravating conduct like violating protective orders or threatening witnesses. For leniency, I consider whether the behavior is unlikely to recur, past law-abiding conduct, and responsiveness to probation. Ultimately, it’s not about counting factors, but about fitting the sentence to the specific facts of the person and the crime.

Do you view a person’s sentence as a matter of punishment or rehabilitation? Please explain.

Our state constitution answers that question. Article 1, Section 18 says our penal code must be founded on the principles of reformation, not vindictive justice. So I don’t see a sentence as punishment or rehabilitation, it’s both. A sentence must hold a person accountable, protect the public, and reflect the harm done to victims. But it should also leave the door open, wherever it responsibly can, to a person turning their life around. My goal in every case is a sentence that answers the wrong that was done while giving a person the chance to become someone who won’t stand before a court again.

Outside of your professional life, have you had direct contact with the criminal justice system? How has that shaped your approach to your work?

Out side of my professional life, I have never had direct contact with the criminal justice system.