MEMORANDUM DECISION
FILED
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D),
this Memorandum Decision shall not be 08/31/2017, 9:52 am
regarded as precedent or cited before any CLERK
Indiana Supreme Court
court except for the purpose of establishing Court of Appeals
and Tax Court
the defense of res judicata, collateral
estoppel, or the law of the case.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Thomas C. Allen Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
Fort Wayne, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana
Katherine Cooper
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Ricky W. Outlaw, August 31, 2017
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
02A05-1703-CR-545
v. Appeal from the Allen Superior
Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable Wendy W. Davis,
Appellee-Plaintiff. Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
02D04-1609-F6-1029
Pyle, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A05-1703-CR-545| August 31, 2017 Page 1 of 4
Statement of the Case
[1] Ricky Outlaw appeals his conviction by jury of Class A misdemeanor battery.1
His sole argument is that there is insufficient evidence to support his conviction.
Concluding that the evidence is sufficient, we affirm Outlaw’s battery
conviction.
[2] We affirm.
Issue
The sole issue for our review is whether there is sufficient
evidence to support Outlaw’s battery conviction.
Facts
[3] On September 9, 2016, Cameron Caplinger (“Caplinger”) and Chad Buzzard
(“Buzzard”) were working as loss prevention officers at a Sears store located in
a Fort Wayne shopping mall. As they monitored the surveillance cameras,
Caplinger observed Outlaw pick up a shoe box from a shoe display, place the
box under his arm, and walk out of the store without paying for the
merchandise.
[4] Caplinger and Buzzard caught up with Outlaw as he left the store and asked
him to return. Outlaw began to comply and then suddenly turned to run.
1
IND. CODE § 35-42-2-1. Outlaw was also convicted of Level 6 felony theft; however, he does not appeal that
conviction.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A05-1703-CR-545| August 31, 2017 Page 2 of 4
When Buzzard grabbed Outlaw, Outlaw punched Buzzard in the back of the
head with his fist, stating “you can’t touch me, get your hands off me.” (Tr.
Vol. 2 at 177). Caplinger saw Outlaw “turn around and strike [Buzzard] in the
head.” (Tr. Vol. 2 at 123).
[5] The State charged Outlaw with theft and battery. At trial, Outlaw testified that
when Buzzard grabbed him, he stumbled backwards and unintentionally made
contact with Buzzard. The jury convicted Outlaw as charged, and Outlaw
appeals the battery conviction.
Decision
[6] Outlaw argues that there is insufficient evidence to support his battery
conviction. 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. 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.
[7] In order to convict Outlaw of battery as a Class A misdemeanor, the State had
to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he knowingly or intentionally touched
Buzzard in a rude, insolent or angry manner resulting in bodily injury. See I.C.
§ 35-42-2-1. Outlaw acknowledges that he touched Buzzard but disputes that
he knowingly or intentionally did so. He specifically contends that he “lost his
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A05-1703-CR-545| August 31, 2017 Page 3 of 4
balance and accidentally made contact with the loss prevention officer as he
stumbled backwards.” (Outlaw’s Br. 10). According to Outlaw, an “accidental
hitting is consistent with what would be expected. . . . When someone loses
their balance, they generally use their arms to counter balance their momentum
and weight and their arms will flail about.” (Outlaw’s Br. 10-11).
[8] However, our review of the evidence reveals that Buzzard testified that Outlaw
used his fist to punch Buzzard in the back of the head, stating “you can’t touch
me, get your hands off me.” (Tr. Vol. 2 at 177). Caplinger also testified that he
saw Outlaw turn around and strike Buzzard in the head. This evidence is
sufficient to support Outlaw’s battery conviction. Outlaw’s argument that he
accidentally hit Buzzard in the head is an invitation for us to reweigh the
evidence and judge the credibility of witnesses, which we cannot and will not
do. See Drane, 867 N.E.2d at 146.
[9] Affirmed.
Riley, J., and Robb, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A05-1703-CR-545| August 31, 2017 Page 4 of 4