Sentence modification denied for Wade

Saturday, February 13, 2010

GREENCASTLE -- A petition to the Putnam County Circuit Court to modify the sentence of a Greencastle woman currently serving prison time has been denied without a hearing.

Tamera S. Wade, 46, was convicted in December 2008 of Class D felony theft. Special Judge Thomas Milligan gave Wade a 2 1/2-year sentence, 18 months of which was to spent on home detention with the balance to be served on probation.

On June 10, Putnam County Community Corrections filed a petition to revoke Wade's probation. In the petition, probation officials claimed Wade began violating the terms of her probation in late January 2009.

Wade was arrested, and was held in jail without bond until a fact-finding hearing on July 22. Milligan reinstated the entirety of Wade's sentencing, giving her credit for 86 days served.

Wade's attorney, Darrell E. Felling, filed a petition to modify his client's sentence on Dec. 9. The state filed its objection to the petition one day later.

In his petition Felling noted that Wade has completed several different classes and workshops during her time in prison. He also said Wade realized how her actions had impacted others and was remorseful.

Felling said Wade had been approved for work release in Hendricks County, and that her absence from the home had caused emotional and financial hardships for her family, which includes a college-age son and an elementary-aged son.

Wade is currently incarcerated at the Madison Correctional Facility. The Indiana Department of Correction Web site lists her earliest possible release date as Sept. 8.

Wade was originally arrested in September 2008. She stole over $130,000 over four years from her former employer, Edward Wood & Co. in Greencastle.

View 6 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • Sure it is financially hard on a family when you don't have an extra $32,500 a year coming in. Oh, plus what ever her salary was at her employer. That is a big hit in the wallet.

    -- Posted by mad-mom on Sat, Feb 13, 2010, at 9:25 AM
  • She may be remorseful, but she's not trustworthy. She violated the terms of her probation. Let her complete the work release program and re-evaluate the situation in September. Family going through a hardship - they'll get through it. The oldest may have to put college on hold a year or two.

    -- Posted by Scripted Spontaneity on Sat, Feb 13, 2010, at 12:10 PM
  • If you can't do the time,don't do the crime! Done had to many chances already.

    -- Posted by obeone on Sat, Feb 13, 2010, at 1:13 PM
  • Seems pretty simple to me. Actions have consequences. She should've thought about her children before she decided to steal!

    -- Posted by just a local on Sat, Feb 13, 2010, at 2:23 PM
  • Hmm, gotta agree. The obvious, yes, it's hard without all that extra money... Son may just have to work his way through college like so many others. It's unfortunate but many others are struggling who DIDN'T steal!

    -- Posted by bannerstuff on Mon, Feb 15, 2010, at 9:29 AM
  • She was given a very soft sentence, and didn't take it seriously, so she reaped the consequences of those actions. I am glad to see that there was no sentence modification. Her oldest son will actually be eligible for more financial aid with only one parent working.

    -- Posted by ursula on Tue, Feb 16, 2010, at 10:23 AM
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: