Juventino Vargas-Rodriguez v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) ( 2017 )


Menu:
  • MEMORANDUM DECISION
    Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D),
    this Memorandum Decision shall not be                                FILED
    regarded as precedent or cited before any
    court except for the purpose of establishing                    Aug 09 2017, 9:28 am
    the defense of res judicata, collateral                              CLERK
    Indiana Supreme Court
    estoppel, or the law of the case.                                   Court of Appeals
    and Tax Court
    ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT                                   ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
    Thomas P. Keller                                         Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
    South Bend, Indiana                                      Attorney General of Indiana
    James B. Martin
    Deputy Attorney General
    Indianapolis, Indiana
    IN THE
    COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
    Juventino Vargas-Rodriguez,                              August 9, 2017
    Appellant-Defendant,                                     Court of Appeals Case No.
    71A03-1609-CR-2118
    v.                                               Appeal from the Saint Joseph
    Superior Court
    State of Indiana,                                        The Honorable Elizabeth Hurley,
    Appellee-Plaintiff                                       Judge
    Trial Court Cause No.
    71D08-1509-MR-13
    Vaidik, Chief Judge.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 71A03-1609-CR-2118 | August 9, 2017    Page 1 of 5
    Case Summary
    [1]   Juventino Vargas-Rodriguez appeals his conviction for murder. Ricardo
    Ramirez shot and killed Jorge Garcia, and Vargas-Rodriguez was convicted of
    murder as an accomplice. On appeal, he concedes that he is responsible for
    Garcia’s death, but he contends that the evidence is insufficient to support a
    murder conviction because the State did not prove that he intended for Garcia
    to be killed or that he knew that Garcia would be killed. Instead, Vargas-
    Rodriguez argues that he should be convicted only of reckless homicide.
    Finding sufficient evidence, we affirm his conviction for murder.
    Facts and Procedural History
    [2]   Around 3:00 a.m. on September 6, 2015, Garcia and his friends left a club in
    South Bend. Vargas-Rodriguez was at the same club. As Garcia walked out,
    he and Vargas-Rodriguez got into an argument. With encouragement from
    friends, Garcia walked away in hopes of continuing his birthday celebration.
    Garcia left in a gray truck being driven by his friend. They followed more
    friends to a house party. Vargas-Rodriguez then left the club to go get his white
    Chevrolet Impala to “ride around and drink” with his friend, Luis Gonzalez.
    Tr. Vol. I p. 167.
    [3]   Later, Vargas-Rodriguez, while driving around, encountered the truck Garcia
    was in. Vargas-Rodriguez and Gonzalez felt the truck was “trying to drive
    [them] off the road.” 
    Id. at 168.
    Eventually, Vargas-Rodriguez eluded the truck
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 71A03-1609-CR-2118 | August 9, 2017   Page 2 of 5
    and picked up two more friends, Manuel Vargas and Ricardo Ramirez, who
    suggested that they “go find them” and “see if they want to fight.” 
    Id. at 169-
    70. Vargas-Rodriguez began searching for the truck with Gonzalez as the front-
    seat passenger, Vargas as the right rear passenger, and Ramirez as the left rear
    passenger.
    [4]   After Vargas-Rodriguez found the truck, he began chasing it southbound on
    Harris Street. While on Harris Street, Ramirez fired at least nine shots at the
    truck within three to four seconds. Most shots struck the back of the truck. The
    truck turned west on Sample Street, and Vargas-Rodriguez continued to chase it
    at seventy miles per hour. Ramirez announced that he found more bullets in
    his pocket and loaded two into his gun. See Tr. Vol. II pp. 74-75. The truck
    turned north on Olive Street, and Vargas-Rodriguez followed. Vargas-
    Rodriguez pulled up “side by side” to the cab of the truck, and Ramirez fired
    two more shots. 
    Id. at 65.
    One bullet entered the driver’s door, and the other
    struck Garcia in the head. Vargas-Rodriguez then proceeded ahead and pulled
    over on the side of the road. He and his friends threw Corona bottles at the
    truck as it passed.
    [5]   Garcia was taken to the hospital, where he later died from the gunshot wound
    to his head. The State charged Vargas-Rodriguez with murder as an
    accomplice to Ramirez.1 A jury trial was held. The jury was instructed on
    1
    Ramirez was also charged with murder and is currently awaiting trial.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 71A03-1609-CR-2118 | August 9, 2017   Page 3 of 5
    murder and reckless homicide; it found Vargas-Rodriguez guilty of murder.
    The trial court sentenced Vargas-Rodriguez to fifty years in the Indiana
    Department of Correction.
    [6]   Vargas-Rodriguez now appeals.
    Discussion and Decision
    [7]   Vargas-Rodriguez contends that the evidence is insufficient to support his
    conviction for murder. He concedes that the evidence is “sufficient to convict
    him under accomplice liability for his involvement in the death of Jorge
    Garcia”; however, he “disputes that the State proved that the crime committed
    was Murder.” Appellant’s Br. p. 13. Rather, he claims that the evidence only
    supports a finding of reckless homicide.
    [8]   When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction,
    appellate courts must consider only the probative evidence and reasonable
    inferences supporting the verdict. Sallee v. State, 
    51 N.E.3d 130
    , 133 (Ind.
    2016). It is the fact-finder’s role, not that of appellate courts, to assess witness
    credibility and weigh the evidence to determine whether it is sufficient to
    support a conviction. Drane v. State, 
    867 N.E.2d 144
    , 146 (Ind. 2007). To
    preserve this structure, when appellate courts are confronted with conflicting
    evidence, we must consider the evidence most favorable to the trial court’s
    ruling. 
    Id. The evidence
    is sufficient if an inference may reasonably be drawn
    from it to support the verdict. 
    Id. at 147.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 71A03-1609-CR-2118 | August 9, 2017   Page 4 of 5
    [9]    Murder occurs when a person “knowingly or intentionally kills another human
    being.” Ind. Code § 35-42-1-1(1). “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 § 35-41-2-2(b). Here, Vargas-Rodriguez knew that
    Ramirez had a gun when he turned west on Sample Street because of the volley
    of shots fired into the back of the truck on Harris Street. Vargas-Rodriguez
    continued to chase the truck at seventy miles per hour. Ramirez announced
    that he found more bullets as he reloaded his gun, and Vargas-Rodriguez knew
    that there was a high probability that Ramirez could kill someone when he
    pulled his car next to the truck on Olive Street. Therefore, the evidence
    presented at trial was sufficient for a reasonable jury to conclude that Vargas-
    Rodriguez committed murder when he chased the truck, pulled up next to it,
    and aided Ramirez to make his final two shots.
    [10]   Affirmed.
    Bailey, J., and Robb, J., concur.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 71A03-1609-CR-2118 | August 9, 2017   Page 5 of 5
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 71A03-1609-CR-2118

Filed Date: 8/9/2017

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 8/9/2017