30-year sentence affirmed for teen linked to killing of IU doctor, educator

The Indiana Court of Appeals has affirmed a young adult’s decades-long sentence for felony burglary convictions that stemmed from several residential break-ins he committed as a teen, finding that his sentence is not inappropriate.

At age 17, Nehemiah Merriweather and three cohorts broke into three different Indianapolis homes to commit theft, resulting in the November 2017 murder of Dr. Kevin Rodgers, who was program director emeritus of the emergency medicine residency at the Indiana University School of Medicine. Merriweather was eventually charged with murder, one count of Level 1 felony burglary and three counts of Level 4 felony burglary. 

A plea agreement provided that Merriweather, who denies knowing which of his cohorts shot Rodgers, was not the shooter and capped his sentence at 30 years. Merriweather ultimately was convicted of three counts of Level 4 felony burglary and sentenced to 10 years per count, to run consecutively.

The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed in Nehemiah Merriweather v. State of Indiana, 20A-CR-00565, first finding that Merriweather did not waive appellate review of his sentence despite the state’s assertion that he had when he executed his plea agreement.

“This case is much more akin to (Ricci v. State, 894 N.E.2d 1089, 1093-94 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008)) and (Bonilla v. State, 907 N.E.2d 586 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009)) than to (Creech v. State, 887 N.E.2d 73 (Ind. 2008)). As our supreme court very recently reaffirmed, the trial court plays a critical role ‘in safeguarding the validity of such waivers.’ Given the court’s unequivocal advisement to Merriweather, at the plea hearing before he had received the benefit of any bargain, and then again at the sentencing hearing, that he retained the right to appeal his sentence, we find his written waiver of that right a nullity,” Judge Terry Crone wrote for the appellate court.

Regardless, it concluded that Merriweather had not met his burden to demonstrate that his sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature of his offenses or his character.

“Merriweather does not even mention the details and circumstances of his offenses, and any attempt to downplay them would certainly have fallen on deaf ears,” Crone wrote. “His offenses are troubling, to say the least. Merriweather and his cohorts, while armed with a deadly weapon, broke into multiple homes during daytime hours with the intent to commit thefts therein. A homeowner was senselessly shot and killed during one of the burglaries. This harm greatly exceeded the basic statutory elements necessary to simply prove the offenses. If not for the plea agreement sentencing cap, the nature of these offenses would warrant a sentence increase rather than a reduction.”

Finding that Merriweather’s criminal history “overshadows any recent positive changes in behavior while incarcerated,” the appellate court concluded that his sentence was not inappropriate and therefore affirmed.