MEMORANDUM DECISION
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), FILED
this Memorandum Decision shall not be Aug 15 2018, 8:48 am
regarded as precedent or cited before any
CLERK
court except for the purpose of establishing Indiana Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
the defense of res judicata, collateral and Tax Court
estoppel, or the law of the case.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Brian A. Karle Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
Ball Eggleston, PC Attorney General of Indiana
Lafayette, Indiana
Matthew B. Mackenzie
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Wendell H. Lawson, August 15, 2018
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
18A-CR-334
v. Appeal from the Marion Superior
Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable Jane Craney,
Appellee-Plaintiff Senior Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
49G06-1706-F5-24130
Baker, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-334 | August 15, 2018 Page 1 of 5
[1] Wendell Lawson appeals his conviction for Level 5 Felony Operating a Motor
Vehicle with Driving Privileges Forfeited for Life, 1 arguing that the evidence is
insufficient to support the conviction. Finding the evidence sufficient, we
affirm.
Facts
[2] On June 29, 2017, emergency medical technicians, firefighters, and law
enforcement officials responded to a dispatch regarding a vehicle stopped in the
roadway on 18th Street in Indianapolis with a possibly unconscious male driver.
Officials arrived to find a person, later identified as Lawson, in the driver’s seat
of a vehicle that was stopped in the middle of the eastbound lane, with part of
the vehicle sticking into a nearby parking lot. The vehicle’s engine was running
and no one else was inside. One of the firemen turned the ignition off and left
the keys in the ignition. After being roused by officials, Lawson informed a
police officer that he had left a friend’s house on the east side of town and was
on his way home.
[3] On June 30, 2017, the State charged Lawson with Level 5 felony operating a
motor vehicle with driving privileges forfeited for life. Following a January 31,
2018, bench trial, the trial court found Lawson guilty as charged. The trial
1
Ind. Code § 9-30-10-17(a)(1).
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-334 | August 15, 2018 Page 2 of 5
court sentenced Lawson to three years, with one year executed on home
detention and two years suspended to probation. Lawson now appeals.
Discussion and Decision
[4] Lawson’s sole argument on appeal is that the evidence does not establish that
he was operating the vehicle in which he was found. When reviewing the
sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, we must consider only the
probative evidence and reasonable inferences supporting the conviction and will
neither assess witness credibility nor reweigh the evidence. Drane v. State, 867
N.E.2d 144, 146 (Ind. 2007). We will affirm unless no reasonable factfinder
could find the elements of the crime proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Id.
[5] To convict Lawson of the charged offense, the State was required to prove
beyond a reasonable doubt that he operated a motor vehicle after his driving
privileges had been forfeited for life. I.C. § 9-30-10-17(a)(1). He only contests
whether the evidence establishes that he was operating the vehicle.
[6] The record reveals that Lawson was found alone in a vehicle that was stopped
in the middle of an Indianapolis roadway. He was in the driver’s seat and the
engine was running. He told responding officers that he was traveling from a
friend’s house on the other side of town to his own residence; at no point did he
say that anyone else had ever been in the vehicle with him. This evidence
readily supports the trial court’s conclusion that Lawson was operating the
vehicle.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-334 | August 15, 2018 Page 3 of 5
[7] Lawson points to evidence in the record that raises a question as to whether the
vehicle’s engine was, indeed, running when officials responded to the scene.
This, however, amounts to a request that we reweigh the evidence, which we
decline to do.
[8] He also directs our attention to this Court’s opinion in Clark v. State, 611 N.E.2d
181 (Ind. Ct. App. 1993), in support of his assertion that the evidence does not
establish that he was operating the vehicle. In Clark, a law enforcement official
discovered the defendant sleeping in a car at an apartment complex. Id. at 181.
Clark was sitting in the driver’s seat, the engine was running, the car lights were
on, and the transmission was in park. The car was sitting in a parking spot with
the front end sticking into the roadway going through the apartment complex.
Id. This Court found that because Clark’s vehicle “was parked in a parking
space, however inartfully,” there was no evidence to support a conclusion that
he had been operating the car. Id. at 182.
[9] In this case, in contrast, Lawson’s vehicle was stopped in the middle of the
eastbound lane on 18th Street. The vehicle was “partially” in a nearby parking
lot, “but mostly in the eastbound lane.” Tr. Vol. II p. 14. We find these facts
easily distinguishable from Clark, in which the vehicle was located in a parking
lot and was mostly in a parking spot. In this case, the vehicle was stopped in
the middle of an Indianapolis road, the engine was running, and Lawson, who
was alone in the vehicle, was in the driver’s seat and told officers he was on his
way home from a friend’s house. We find this evidence sufficient to support the
conviction.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-334 | August 15, 2018 Page 4 of 5
[10] The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Bradford, J., and Brown, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-334 | August 15, 2018 Page 5 of 5