*** MEDIA ADVISORY*** September 29, 2009 80-YEAR SENTENCE UPHELD FOR ELKHART COUNTY CHILD MOLESTER’S CONVICTION Media Contact:  Curtis T. Hill, Jr. - 296-1888 A State Appeals Court has affirmed an Elkhart County man’s child-molesting convictions and 80-year prison sentence. On appeal, Kevin Tolliver argued not only that two of his three convictions of Class A Child Molestation violated Indiana’s prohibition against double jeopardy, but that Superior Court No. 3 Judge George Biddlecome’s aggregate term of 80 years was inappropriate, in light of the nature of his offenses and his character.Nevertheless, the Indiana Court of Appeals on Thursday denied Tolliver’s claims.  In finding that Tolliver’s convictions involving the same child did not violate Indiana’s prohibition against double jeopardy, the Court of Appeals pointed out that the evidence, prosecutor argument and jury instructions presented to the jury showed that Tolliver performed two separate, distinct acts of molestation; and it was unreasonable to assume the jury’s verdict was based upon only one act.In arguing the inappropriateness of his sentence, Tolliver’s counsel suggested that the two children were not physically injured during the molestations, and because Tolliver suffered physical and sexual abuse as a child, possessed only a sixth grade education and has been on his own since the age of fourteen, his punishment should have been substantially less. The Court of Appeals, however, took into consideration Judge Biddlecome’s additional assessment that Tolliver was adjudicated a juvenile delinquent for acts that would have been child molestation and sexual battery if committed by an adult.  In the 3-0 ruling, the Court of Appeals wrote that following this adjudication, Tolliver received intensive treatment in a sex offender program but absconded from treatment after a little more than a year and was discharged from probation.  In affirming Judge Biddlecome’s sentence, the Appellate Court emphasized the importance of a punishment that “vindicated” the fact of separate harms and acts against more than one child, noting that within a few hours Tolliver committed multiple offenses against two child victims at different times.  The Court of Appeals did find that because Tolliver committed his offenses in 2006, he was not eligible to be classified as a Credit Restricted Felon and was entitled to earn one day of credit time for either one or two days served instead of the one day of credit time for every six (6) days originally ordered.                                                   *  *  *