MEMORANDUM DECISION
Altice, Chief Judge.
Case Summary
[1] Jerome Williams, appearing pro se, appeals the trial courts denial of his motion to correct erroneous sentence. Williams claims that the trial court abused its discretion in denying his motion because the “face of the record” shows that he was sentenced for an “uncharged murder,” that the language in the charging information was defective, and that he should have been indicted by a grand jury for his alleged offenses. Appellants Brief at 13-14.
[2] We affirm.
Facts and Procedural History
[3] The facts, as reported in Williamss direct appeal are as follows:
On December 17, 1999, Frank Townsend (Townsend) was using his car to provide taxi services to earn extra money for the holidays. At approximately 11:00 p.m., Williams and his cousin, Cleve Williams (Cleve), left a friends house and walked to a gas station. At the gas station, Williams used a payphone to call a cab. Both Williams and Cleve had handguns; Cleve had received one earlier that day from Williams. When Townsend arrived at the gas station, Williams sat in the front seat and Cleve sat in the back seat. Williams told Townsend to keep his hands on the steering wheel and drive.
A few minutes later, the car stopped near the intersection of North Beville and Coyner. Williams’ and Cleves aunt lived across the street from that location. Almost immediately after the car stopped, shooting started from the front seat area of the car. Cleve then pulled out his gun and started shooting. When Cleve stopped shooting, he got out of the car through the back passengers window and ran to his aunts house. A few minutes after Cleve reached his aunts house, Williams also entered his aunts house and was bleeding. Cleve then left and went to his uncles house.
Indianapolis police officer Brian Bethel (Officer Bethel) was patrolling the area of Brookside Parkway in Indianapolis at around 11:00 p.m. Initially, when Officer Bethel drove through the intersection of Beville and Coyner, he did not observe anything unusual. When he drove through a few minutes later at 11:16 p.m., Officer Bethel saw a car sitting in the road facing northeast on Coyner. The headlights of the vehicle were on, the car was running, and there was glass broken out of the drivers side window. Officer Bethel stopped to investigate and observed a person slumped in the drivers seat. As he approached the car, Officer Bethel saw that several of the windows had been broken out, all of the cars doors were closed, and that the man, who was later identified as Townsend, in the drivers seat appeared to be unconscious. Townsend had blood on him, and a handgun was lying a few inches away from his hand.
Officer Bethel moved the handgun for safety reasons and called in for backup. At that time, a woman came from 2214 Coyner and told Officer Bethel that there was another person shot inside the house. Another officer arrived at the scene and went with the woman to check on the person inside the house. Officer Bethel then returned to Townsend and noticed that he had stopped breathing. Officer Bethel pulled Townsend out of the car to assist him. The car began to move, so Officer Bethel quickly put the car in park. When Officer Bethel returned to Townsend, he was breathing again. The ambulance arrived shortly and took care of Townsend. Officer Bethel then went to the womans house and saw Williams lying on the floor bleeding. Another ambulance arrived and took care of Williams.
Indianapolis Police Lieutenant Mark Rice (Lieutenant Rice) arrived at Wishard Hospital at 11:52 p.m., in response to a call regarding two people who had been shot at Beville and Coyner. Lieutenant Rice first checked on Townsend, who was the most critically injured. Townsend was being treated by the emergency room personnel. He had an oxygen mask over his mouth and had chest tubes inserted in his chest. Lieutenant Rice asked Townsend what had happened, and Townsend told him that two young men had tried to rob him. Townsend stated that one of the men had been in the front seat, and one had been in the back seat. He told Lieutenant Rice that he knew that the man in the front seat had shot him, and he was possibly shot by the man in the back seat. The two men had also asked Townsend how much money he had. Townsend stated that he had a gun under his right leg and fired before the man in the front seat had. Townsend told Lieutenant Rice that he had picked up the two men at 1105 Jefferson.
Lucille Townsend (Lucille), Townsends wife, also arrived at the hospital at approximately 11:45 p.m. and reached the hospital about thirty minutes after receiving the notification. When Lucille saw her husband, he was on a gurney in the emergency room and was in a lot of pain. There was blood on the floor and the bed, and Townsend had tubes and IVs sticking out of his body. Townsend told Lucille that he had picked up two young men at 10th and Jefferson. He stated that when the men entered the car they had their guns drawn, and they tried to rob him. Townsend said that he had pulled out his own gun, but it had jammed when he fired it.
On January 19, 2000, Townsend underwent major surgery, and his gallbladder was removed. For part of that hospitalization Townsend had a trach tube inserted to assist him with breathing. On March 4, 2000, Townsend was in pain and was disoriented. He had an elevated fever and high white blood cell count. On March 5, 2000, Townsend, while sitting in a chair, went into cardiac arrest when his trach tube became blocked by mucous. He did not recover from the lack of oxygen to his brain, and he was taken off of life support on March 8.
Williams v. State, 782 N.E.2d 1039, 1044-45 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (Williams I).
[4] On March 31, 2000, the State charged Williams with murder, a felony, attempted robbery, a Class A felony, carrying a handgun without a license, a Class A misdemeanor, and dangerous possession of a handgun, a class A misdemeanor. Following a two-day jury trial that commenced on October 22, 2001, Williams was found guilty of murder, attempted robbery, and carrying a handgun without a license. At the sentencing hearing, the trial court merged the attempted robbery and carrying a handgun without a license convictions into the murder conviction. The trial court then sentenced Williams for murder to sixty-five years of incarceration in the Indiana Department of Correction.
[5] Williams appealed to this court challenging, among other things, the appropriateness of his sentence, which a panel of this court affirmed. See id. at 1052. Williams subsequently filed a petition for post-conviction relief, alleging ineffective assistance of both trial and appellate counsel. The post-conviction court denied Williamss request for relief, and a panel of this court affirmed. See Williams v. State, No. 49A04-1008-PC-547, slip op. at 3 (Ind. Ct. App. Aug. 8, 2011) (Williams II), trans. denied.
[6] Thereafter, on November 17, 2023, Williams filed a pro se motion to correct erroneous sentence, claiming that the trial court improperly sentenced him for an “uncharged murder.” Appellants Appendix Vol. II at 46. Williams further maintained that his sentence was erroneous because his criminal offense was not “presented on an indictment of the grand jury,” and that the language in the charging information was “flawed.” Id. at 46-52. On December 15, 2023, the trial court summarily denied Williamss motion.
[7] Williams now appeals.
Discussion and Decision
[8] A motion to correct sentence pursuant to Ind. Code § 35-38-1-15
1
is appropriate only for “sentencing errors that are clear from the face of the judgment imposing the sentence in light of the statutory authority.” Woodcox v. State, 30 N.E.3d 748, 751 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015), trans. denied. On appeal from the denial of a motion to correct erroneous sentence, we review the trial courts ruling only for an abuse of discretion. Id. at 750. An abuse of discretion only occurs if “the trial courts decision is against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before it.” Id.
[9] In this case, Williams maintains that his sentence was erroneous for reasons that extend beyond the face of the sentencing order, including a challenge to the charging information, an assertion that there is a difference between felony murder and murder for sentencing purposes, and a claim that differences exist between charges that arise from an indictment versus those that arise out of a charging information. Use of the motion to correct an erroneous sentence should be narrowly confined to claims apparent “from the face of the sentence judgment, and the ‘facially erroneous’ prerequisite should ․ be strictly applied.” Robinson v. State, 805 N.E.2d 783, 787 (Ind. 2004). As Williamss arguments would require an analysis of non-sentencing matters, they must be raised on direct appeal or in a petition for post-conviction relief.
2
See id.
[10] In sum, the record establishes that Williams was convicted of murder and sentenced to sixty-five years, which was within the range permitted for murder at the time of the offense. See Williams I, 782 N.E.2d at 1045-52; see also Ind. Code § 35-50-2-3. Thus, the trial court properly denied Williamss motion to correct erroneous sentence.
[11] Judgment affirmed.
3
Bailey, J. and Mathias, J., concur.
FOOTNOTES
1
. This statute provides: “If the convicted person is erroneously sentenced, the mistake does not render the sentence void. The sentence shall be corrected after written notice is given to the convicted person. The convicted person and his counsel must be present when the corrected sentence is ordered. A motion to correct sentence must be in writing and supported by a memorandum of law specifically pointing out the defect in the original sentence.”
2
. As Williams has already exhausted those possible remedies, he must seek permission to file a successive post-conviction petition to pursue any of these claims. See Ind. Post-Conviction Rule (1)(12).
3
. Williams has filed two motions to correct the trial courts record and a motion to strike the appellees brief. We deny Williamss motions in an order issued contemporaneously with this opinion.
Memorandum Decision by Chief Judge Altice
Judges Bailey and Mathias concur.