A man who unsuccessfully argued that he should be released to parole rather than probation failed to persuade the Indiana Court of Appeals on Thursday.
Derek Aguilar pleaded guilty in 2006 in a burglary case and another felony case. He was sentenced to 20 years in prison in the burglary case and 10 years suspended to probation in the second matter, which ran consecutively to the burglary sentence. The Adams Circuit Court thus sentenced Aguilar to 30 years in the Department of Correction with 10 years suspended to probation.
After serving time on his burglary conviction, Aguilar was released on parole in April 2016 and also placed on probation in the other matter. In August of that year, the state alleged a probation violation that included marijuana use. Aguilar and the state agreed he would serve about six-and-a-half years in the DOC with no further probationary period.
After Aguilar began serving his sentence, the parole board heard arguments that he had violated parole by failing to report to his parole officer, and the board revoked 10 years of his credit time.
In his petition for post-conviction relief, Aguilar argued he was improperly placed on parole, he was denied due process and there were other errors in the handling of his sentence. The Adams Circuit Court denied his petition, and the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed Thursday in Derek R. Aguilar v. State of Indiana, 20A-PC-949.
“Aguilar agreed to consecutive sentences and the arrangement of his sentences was a result of the plea agreement and original sentencing orders — not, as Aguilar asserts, the result of the parole board exceeding its statutory authority. Thus, we cannot say that the arrangement of the executed sentences is improper,” Judge L. Mark Bailey wrote.