MEMORANDUM DECISION
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), FILED
this Memorandum Decision shall not be
Jan 14 2019, 8:56 am
regarded as precedent or cited before any
court except for the purpose of establishing CLERK
Indiana Supreme Court
the defense of res judicata, collateral Court of Appeals
and Tax Court
estoppel, or the law of the case.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Ronald J. Moore Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
The Moore Law Firm, LLC Attorney General of Indiana
Richmond, Indiana
Benjamin J. Shoptaw
Angela Sanchez
Deputy Attorneys General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
David Darr, January 14, 2019
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
18A-CR-1516
v. Appeal from the Wayne Circuit
Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable David A. Kolger,
Appellee-Plaintiff. Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
89C01-1610-F4-56
Pyle, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-1516 | January 14, 2019 Page 1 of 4
Statement of the Case
[1] David Darr (“Darr”) appeals his conviction by jury of Level 4 felony burglary 1
as well as his adjudication as an habitual offender. He argues that the evidence
is insufficient to support his conviction because the State failed to prove his
identity beyond a reasonable doubt. Concluding that the evidence is sufficient
to support Darr’s conviction, we affirm.
[2] We affirm.
Issues
Whether there is sufficient evidence to support Darr’s conviction.
Facts
[3] The facts most favorable to the verdict reveal that in October 2016, Roger
Whitsit (“Whitsit”) heard a person kicking in the door to his neighbor John
Brown’s (“Brown”) apartment. Whitsit called Brown on his cell phone to let
him know that someone was breaking into his apartment. Whitsit then dialed
911 to report that he had seen two men leaving Brown’s apartment. Whitsit
told the 911 operator that one of the men was wearing black shoes, black socks,
camouflage shorts, and a gray sweatshirt with a black hoody under it.
[4] After receiving Whitsit’s telephone call, Brown immediately drove to his
apartment and saw Darr leaving the complex. Darr was carrying one of
1
IND. CODE § 35-43-2-1.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-1516 | January 14, 2019 Page 2 of 4
Brown’s pillowcases, which contained items from Brown’s apartment. As Darr
ran across the street, a surveillance camera from a nearby house captured his
image. Darr dropped Brown’s belongings and hid under the deck of another
house.
[5] Richmond Police Department officers arrived at the scene and found Darr
under the deck. Darr was wearing black shoes, black socks, camouflage shorts,
and a gray sweatshirt with a black hoody under it. The officers returned Darr
to Brown’s apartment complex, where Whitsit identified him as the man whom
he had seen leaving Brown’s apartment. In addition, Brown identified him as
the man he had seen fleeing with a pillowcase containing Brown’s personal
items.
[6] The State charged Darr with Level 4 felony burglary and alleged that he was an
habitual offender. At trial, the State’s exhibits included the surveillance video
that showed images of Darr fleeing the scene and the pillowcase that Darr had
dropped. Whitsit and Brown both identified Darr in court.
[7] The jury convicted Darr of burglary, and Darr admitted to being an habitual
offender. Darr now appeals his burglary conviction.
Decision
[8] Darr argues that there is insufficient evidence to support his conviction because
the State failed to prove his identity beyond a reasonable doubt. Our standard
of review for sufficiency of the evidence claims is well settled. We consider
only the probative evidence and reasonable inferences supporting the verdict.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-1516 | January 14, 2019 Page 3 of 4
Drane v. State, 867 N.E.2d 144, 146 (Ind. 2007). We do not reweigh the
evidence or judge witness credibility. Id. We will affirm the conviction unless
no reasonable fact finder could find the elements of the crime proven beyond a
reasonable doubt. Id. The evidence is sufficient if an inference may be
reasonably drawn from it to support the verdict. Id. at 147.
[9] Here our review of the evidence reveals that Whitsit saw Darr leaving Brown’s
apartment, and Brown saw Darr fleeing with Brown’s pillowcase and personal
items. A surveillance video showed Darr dropping the pillowcase as he fled.
Police found Darr under the deck of a nearby house and returned him to the
scene, where Whitsit and Brown both identified him. Whitsit and Brown also
identified Darr at trial. This evidence is sufficient to establish Brown’s identity
beyond a reasonable doubt and to support his burglary conviction.
[10] Affirmed.
Najam, J., and Altice, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-1516 | January 14, 2019 Page 4 of 4