Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
An Allen County man’s child molesting convictions and 45-year prison sentence will stand, after the Indiana Court Appeals ruled a trial court did not err in giving jury instructions or denying the man’s motions for a directed verdict.
According to court records, the state charged Raymond Borroel in April 2022 with attempted child molesting and child molesting.
A jury trial was held in September 2023. The trial court provided preliminary jury instructions, which included reading the charging information and listing the statutory elements of the charged offenses. The trial court used the word “victim” when referencing the charges and the statutory elements.
At the conclusion of the state’s case, Borroel moved for a directed verdict, which the trial court denied.
Borroel then testified in his own defense. He denied the allegations but admitted that he operated a daycare out of his home with another daycare operator and that he was alone at times with the children at the daycare.
Borroel renewed his motion for a directed verdict at the conclusion of the evidence, and the trial court again denied the motion. The jury found Borroel guilty as charged.
In his appeal, Borroel argued that the trial court erred by using the word “victim” when delivering the preliminary jury instructions.
The appellate court was not persuaded that the trial court’s use of “victim” in the preliminary instructions constitutes fundamental error.
“The trial court merely informed the jury of the charging information and the elements of the charged offenses. The trial court also repeatedly impressed upon the jurors their obligation to decide the facts of the case for themselves,” the appellate court’s opinion stated, adding that sufficient evidence supported Borroel’s convictions.
The appellate court noted that Borreol faced a maximum sentence of 58 years in prison, but only received 45 at his sentencing.
Although Borroel had no prior criminal history and witnesses spoke highly of him at the sentencing hearing, the appellate court was not persuaded that these demonstrate good character sufficient to warrant revision of Borroel’s sentence.
The case is Raymond Borroel v. State of Indiana , 23A-CR-2737.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.