ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Kurt A. Young Steve Carter
Nashville, IN Attorney General of Indiana
Joseph A. Samreta
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, IN
IN THE
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA
RAYLON D. YOUNG, )
)
Appellant (Defendant Below), )
)
v. ) Cause No. 49S00-0012-CR-806
)
STATE OF INDIANA, )
)
Appellee (Plaintiff Below). )
APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT
The Honorable Cale Bradford, Judge
Cause No. 49G01-9511-CF-173081
January 18, 2002
SHEPARD, Chief Justice.
A jury found Raylon D. Young guilty of murder, and the trial court
sentenced him to sixty-five years in prison. In this direct appeal, Young
argues that the evidence supports only reckless homicide, not murder. We
affirm.
Facts and Procedural History
On the night of November 19, 1995, Korey Roney went to Tajuan
Johnson’s home in Indianapolis, where Johnson and seven other people had
gathered. Roney wrestled playfully with Marvin Graves in the front yard
while the others watched. As Roney and Graves wrestled, Raylon Young’s
blue Oldsmobile Ninety-Eight pulled up to the house. Young, who was in the
passenger seat, said, “what’s up now,” and lobbed the group with various
well-known racial and sexual epithets. (R. at 236, 244-45, 316.) Young
then pointed a gun at the crowd and fired at least two shots; one of these
fatally struck Roney in the head.
After Young fired the shots, the car continued down the street, turned
around, and came back towards the group. As the car passed the house a
second time, Young fired several more shots while leaning out the passenger
window and shooting across the hood of the car.
Young’s lawyer conceded during closing argument that Young killed
Roney. He also conceded that Young’s behavior was reckless. Thus, the
only serious dispute was whether Young acted knowingly, or merely
recklessly.
Sufficiency of the Evidence
When reviewing sufficiency claims, we neither reweigh the evidence nor
assess the credibility of witnesses. Thornton v. State, 712 N.E.2d 960
(Ind. 1998). We affirm the conviction if the probative evidence, viewed in
the light most favorable to the jury’s verdict, and reasonable inferences
drawn therefrom could have led a jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a
reasonable doubt. Id.
To convict for murder, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt
that the defendant knowingly or intentionally killed another human
being.[1] Ind. Code Ann. § 35-42-1-1(1) (West 1998). “A person engages in
conduct ‘knowingly’ if, when he engages in the conduct, he is aware of a
high probability that he is doing so.” Ind. Code Ann. § 35-41-2-2(b) (West
1998). One “engages in conduct ‘recklessly’ if he engages in the conduct
in plain, conscious, and unjustifiable disregard of harm that might result
and the disregard involves a substantial deviation from acceptable
standards of conduct.” Id. at § 35-41-2-2(c).
Thus, to sustain the verdict, the evidence must show that Young was
aware of a high probability that someone’s death would result from his
actions. Because knowledge is the mental state of the actor, the trier of
fact must resort to reasonable inferences of its existence. Jernigan v.
State, 612 N.E.2d 609 (Ind. Ct. App. 1993).
A knowing killing may be inferred from the use of a deadly weapon in a
way likely to cause death. Barker v. State, 695 N.E.2d 925 (Ind. 1998).
Young’s firing of multiple shots at a group of people gathered on a front
lawn, killing Korey Roney, was adequate evidence to permit a jury to
conclude that Young used a deadly weapon in a manner likely to cause death
or serious injury.
Moreover, intent may be inferred from the severity, duration, or
brutality of the attack. Mitchell v. State, 726 N.E.2d 1228 (Ind. 2000).
Several witnesses saw Young point a gun at the group and fire multiple
shots. After driving away, Young returned and fired several more shots at
the group. The nature and duration of the attack also sustain the jury’s
conclusion that Young was aware of a high probability that his actions
would result in someone’s death.
Conclusion
We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Dickson, Sullivan, Boehm, and Rucker, JJ., concur.
-----------------------
[1] The information alleged only that Young “knowingly” killed. (R. at 40.)