Alan Cornelius Landry v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) ( 2018 )

MEMORANDUM DECISION
FILED
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), Jun 11 2018, 5:29 am
this Memorandum Decision shall not be CLERK
Indiana Supreme Court
regarded as precedent or cited before any Court of Appeals
and Tax Court
court except for the purpose of establishing
the defense of res judicata, collateral
estoppel, or the law of the case.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Mary P. Lake Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
La Porte, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana
James B. Martin
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Alan Cornelius Landry, June 11, 2018
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
46A03-1710-CR-2373
v. Appeal from the
LaPorte Superior Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable
Appellee-Plaintiff. Michael S. Bergerson, Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
46D01-1611-MR-7
Kirsch, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 46A03-1710-CR-2373 | June 11, 2018 Page 1 of 12
Alan Cornelius Landry “Landry” was convicted of murder,1 a felony, for killing
Nekia Hyler (“Hyler”). He appeals his conviction, contending that the State
failed to present sufficient evidence to support his conviction.
We affirm.
Facts and Procedural History
In April 2015, Hyler and her daughter were living at the Stepping Stones
Women’s Shelter (“Stepping Stones”) in Michigan City, Indiana. Tr. Vol. 2 at
90. Hyler’s case manager, Marsha Daniel (“Daniel”), saw Hyler on the
morning of April 13, 2015, for a group session. Id. at 93-94. After the group
session, Hyler came into Daniel’s office and talked with Daniel for
approximately forty-five minutes about some things that had been concerning
to Hyler. Id. at 93-95. Hyler told Daniel she was going to meet someone, and
Daniel recalled that Hyler said the man’s name was “something like Martinez.”
Id. at 94. Hyler was crying and told Daniel that she was scared and that this
would probably be the last time Daniel would see her alive because she thought
she was pregnant and was going to tell the father. Id. Hyler never returned to
Stepping Stones. Id. at 96-97.
Hyler visited her friend, Roberta Jenkins (“Jenkins”) that morning, arriving at
noon. Id. At 70-71; State’s Exs. 104, 106. Hyler received a phone call from
Landry while she was at Jenkins’s home. Id. at 72; State’s Exs. 104, 106.
1
See Ind. Code § 35-42-1-1(1).
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 46A03-1710-CR-2373 | June 11, 2018 Page 2 of 12
Jenkins heard the caller’s voice, and Hyler showed Jenkins a picture of him. Tr.
Vol. II. at 75, 79. Jenkins recognized the caller as a man she knew as “Adoffo.”
Id. at 79, 86-87. While Hyler was speaking on the phone with Landry, she
began asking Landry questions about his identity, and Landry became agitated.
Id. at 78. Jenkins also stated that she saw Landry when he visited Hyler on
Jackson Street in Michigan City in either 2011 or 2012. Id. at 79-80. She
warned Hyler that Landry was not good news and that Hyler should "keep your
distance mind your business.” Id. at 77. Hyler assured Jenkins she was going
to “fall back, she wasn’t even going to go nowhere she was going straight to go
get her baby.” Id. at 77.
Shortly after noon that day, Hyler had been exchanging messages on Facebook
with her friend, Bert McMullan (“McMullan”). State’s Ex. 79. McMullan and
Hyler had not spoken for about six months, but he saw correspondence between
Landry and Hyler on Facebook. Id. at 92, 95. McMullan could tell from
Facebook correspondence that there was something romantic going on between
his own fiancée and Landry. Id. at 93. From viewing Landry’s Facebook
profile pictures, McMullan noticed that Landry identified himself with various
names: Alan Patricia; Martiz Dorsey; and Adoffo Lord. Id. at 96. Hyler
indicated to McMullan that Landry’s actual name was “Marquis” Landry.
State’s Ex. 79. McMullan learned from Hyler that Landry was married and
planned to tell Landry’s wife about Landry’s affairs. Tr. Vol. 3 at 99.
McMullan eventually contacted Landry, advising him that McMullan’s fiancée
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 46A03-1710-CR-2373 | June 11, 2018 Page 3 of 12
“played” not only McMullan but Landry too, as she was “dealing with other
men.” Id. at 100-02.
As Hyler was leaving Jenkins’s home, she received two text messages from
Landry. State’s Exs. 83, 104, 106. Hyler responded that she was at Gardena
Park. State’s Ex. 83. Landry called Hyler twice between 2:06 to 2:08 p.m. Id.
At 2:08 p.m., Google GPS records showed that Hyler was at the 300 block of
Holliday Street, where her body would later be found. Tr. Vol. 4 at 191; State’s
Exs. 104, 106. From 2:10 to 2:18, Hyler exchanged Facebook messages with
McMullan saying, “He is following me now.” State’s Exs. 79, 104, 106. At 2:15
p.m., Hyler sent McMullan a picture she took of an African-American male
standing in the alleyway facing her car. State’s Exs. 79, 81. McMullan
responded, “Pull off … That’s some stalker s**t . . . Don’t f**k around.” State’s
Exs. 79, 104, 106. At 2:18 p.m., Hyler responded, “You right.” State’s Exs. 79,
104, 106.
At 2:21 p.m., Google GPS records show that Hyler’s cell phone was at 8th and
Spring Street in Michigan City. State’s Exs. 104, 106. Landry picked up his
child at the Head Start program at that same address at approximately 2:20 to
2:25 p.m. Tr. Vol. 4 at 65, 82. Images from surveillance cameras located
approximately one mile away showed Landry’s vehicle passing by, going
southbound at 2:26 p.m., and then northbound at 2:33 p.m. Id. at 54; State’s
Exs. 95, 96. Google GPS records show that, at 2:27 p.m., Hyler’s cell phone
was at a location adjacent to Hearts & Hands childcare. State’s Exs. 104, 106.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 46A03-1710-CR-2373 | June 11, 2018 Page 4 of 12
Landry picked up his other daughter from Hearts & Hands childcare at 2:30
p.m. State’s Ex. 100; Tr. Vol. 2 at 173-76.
From 2:29 p.m. to 2:58 p.m., Facebook messages purporting to be from Hyler
were sent to McMullan. State’s Ex. 80. Portia Rice (“Rice”), Hyler’s sister, last
spoke with Hyler on the telephone at approximately noon while Hyler was at
Jenkins’s home. Tr. Vol. 2 at 143. Just after 3:00 p.m., Rice began receiving
odd text messages from Hyler’s phone. The first of the messages stated, “Girl .
. . I’m about to get this 2,500 from this . . . [derogatory term] Bert . . . he owe
me for taking care of some business”; “He had me doing some private
investigator type s**t b***h.” State’s Exs. 2, 104, 106. Rice and Hyler never
referred to one another as “b***h”. Tr. Vol. 2 at 125. Rice also found it odd
that Hyler referred to Bert McMullan using a derogatory term because
McMullan was a friend to both her and Hyler. Id. at 130. At 3:09 p.m., a text
message was sent to Landry’s cell phone from Hyler’s phone with three nude
photographs of Hyler as attachments. State’s Exs. 104, 106; Tr. Vol. 4 at 194.
The last communication sent from Hyler’s phone was a text message to Rice at
3:11 p.m. State’s Exs. 104, 106. The final two GPS location points generated
from Hyler’s phone were at 3:03 and 3:04 p.m., at Walker and Vail Streets and
Holliday and Vail Streets. State’s Exs. 104, 106. Landry’s residence at 335
Walker Street is on the southeast side of the intersection of Walker and Vail.
Tr. Vol. 4 at 191.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 46A03-1710-CR-2373 | June 11, 2018 Page 5 of 12
Because of the odd text messages referencing McMullan, Rice contacted
McMullan. He informed Rice about his interactions with Hyler and provided
her with screen shots of Facebook conversations that he had with Hyler. Tr.
Vol. 2 at 134; Tr. Vol. 4 at 177. The next day, April 14th, 2015, Rice went to
police to file a missing person report for Hyler. Tr. Vol. 2 at 56-57. Rice
provided police with passwords to access Hyler’s Facebook account and her
Badu dating site account. Id. at 57; Tr. Vol. 4 at 177.
At approximately 6:00 p.m. on April 14, 2015, police were called to 314
Holliday Street with a report that a person was slumped over inside a vehicle.
Tr. Vol. 2 at 151. The person was identified as Hyler, and it was determined
that she had died from a gunshot wound to her neck. Tr. Vol. 2 at 148. Police
determined that she was shot by a person standing outside the vehicle, through
the open driver's side window and that, at the time of the shooting, there was
no occupant in the front seat. Tr. Vol. 2 at 203-204. Hyler was in the driver’s
seat of her blue Chevrolet Malibu which was parked in the same alley from
which she had sent the picture to McMullan of the man standing facing her car.
Tr. Vol. 2 at 151, 186, 192; Tr. Vol. 4 at 178-79. A cassette audio adapter wire
extended from the car’s cassette player to outside the window of the driver’s
side door indicating that a person standing outside the driver’s side of the car
had pulled it out and detached it. Tr. Vol. 2 at 211-13. An earring matching the
one in Hyler’s right ear was found in the alleyway approximately 30 feet away
from the vehicle. Tr. Vol. 2 at 186, 198.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 46A03-1710-CR-2373 | June 11, 2018 Page 6 of 12
On April 15, 2015, Landry was taken into custody for questioning. A cellphone
and the clothing he was wearing were recovered from his possession. Tr. Vol. 3
at 44. Other cellphones, firearms, and clothing were obtained in a search of
Landry’s home and vehicle. Id. at 61, 66, 70, 73-74. No blood was found on
any of Landry’s clothing that was collected. Tr. Vol. 2 at 237. Landry told
detectives that he and Hyler had “hooked up” before, that she knew he was
married with a family, and that he thought she wanted him to “chase her.” Id.
Landry stated that he and Hyler had met in alleys to have sex on previous
occasions. Id. He denied having been in the alley on April 13, 2015 and said
that he spoke with Hyler for approximately five minutes at the Duke Gas
Station on School Street. Tr. Vol. 4 at 171; State’s Ex. 91. He said he and Hyler
discussed “hooking up,” but that it would have to be later because his wife
worked until after 6:00 p.m. State’s Ex. 91. Landry claimed that after this five
minute conversation with Hyler, he went to pick up his daughter at the Head
Start program, but was early and went to the Hearts & Hands daycare to get his
other child, then went back to Head Start. Tr. Vol. 4 at 175; State’s Ex. 91.
Landry told detectives that he texted Hyler later, but that he never heard back
from her. State’s Ex. 91. Landry repeatedly insisted he could not have been the
last person to call Hyler, but officers had not disclosed any information
regarding when Hyler’s body had been found. State’s Ex. 91. When one of the
detectives disclosed to Landry that Hyler had been found dead, Landry
responded that Hyler had just sent him some pics, referring to the text message
sent from Hyler’s cell phone at 3:09 p.m. Tr. Vol. 4 at 194-95; State’s Ex. 91.
When he spoke with detectives, Landry wore a grey hat, a zip-up sweatshirt,
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 46A03-1710-CR-2373 | June 11, 2018 Page 7 of 12
and a grey t-shirt, similar to the individual in the picture Hyler sent to
McMullan from the alleyway in the 300 block of Holliday. State’s Ex. 91.
Police searched Landry’s residence and found a picture of a Smith and Wesson
.38 caliber revolver in Landry’s cell phone.
A single bullet and fragments were removed from Hyler’s body during the
autopsy. Tr. Vol. 2 215; State’s Exs. 26, 108. The ballistics exam of the bullet
showed that it was a .38 caliber family with five lands and grooves with a right
hand twist. Tr. Vol. 3 at 191-92. The firearms found in Landry’s home and
vehicle were ruled out as having fired the bullet recovered from Hyler’s body.
Id. at 193-94. Evidence recovered from Landry’s cellphone showed pictures of
other firearms not recovered from his home and vehicle. State’s Exs. 84-87.
One of the weapons depicted was a Smith & Wesson revolver, which could
have fired the bullet. Tr. Vol. 3 at 179, 194; State’s Ex. 85.
The State charged Landry with murder and alleged that he was an habitual
offender. Appellant’s App. Vol. 2 at 13-14, 44-45. The jury found Landry guilty
of murder and determined that he was a habitual offender. Id. at 179, 181, 183-
84. The trial court imposed a sentence of sixty years, enhanced by fifteen years
based on the habitual offender adjudication. Id. at 188-92. Landry now
appeals.
Discussion and Decision
Landry argues that the evidence presented at trial by the State was insufficient
to sustain his murder conviction. When reviewing the sufficiency of evidence
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 46A03-1710-CR-2373 | June 11, 2018 Page 8 of 12
to support a conviction, we do not reweigh the evidence or assess the credibility
of the witnesses. Boggs v. State, 928 N.E.2d 855, 864 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010), trans.
denied. We consider only the evidence most favorable to the verdict and the
reasonable inferences that can be drawn from that evidence. Fuentes v. State, 10
N.E.3d 68, 75 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014), trans. denied. We also consider conflicting
evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court’s ruling. Oster v. State, 992
N.E.2d 871, 875 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013), trans. denied. We will affirm unless no
reasonable fact-finder could find the elements of the crime proven beyond a
reasonable doubt. Lock v. State, 971 N.E.2d 71, 74 (Ind. 2012).
In order to convict Landry of murder, the State was required to prove beyond a
reasonable doubt that Landry did knowingly or intentionally kill Hyler. Ind.
Code § 35-42-1-1(1).
Landry argues that there was no substantial evidence of probative value to
support the verdict of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, that there was no direct
evidence linking him to Hyler’s murder and that the State only presented
circumstantial evidence at trial. He further contends that the State did not
produce an eyewitness or a murder weapon, that there was no DNA evidence,
blood evidence, fingerprint evidence, and ballistics linking him to the crime and
that none of Hyler’s belongings, including her cellphone, were found in his
possession. Landry maintains that the probative evidence and the reasonable
inferences drawn from the evidence, when viewed in a light most favorable to
the conviction, failed to support the verdict of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
We disagree.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 46A03-1710-CR-2373 | June 11, 2018 Page 9 of 12
Hyler was shot with a revolver. While the murder weapon was never found,
police located a picture on Landry’s cellphone that had been taken on March
21, 2015 of a Smith & Wesson .38 caliber revolver which could have been the
weapon that fired the bullet fragments removed from Hyler during the autopsy.
A murder conviction may be based purely on circumstantial evidence as long as
a reasonable inference can be drawn from the circumstantial evidence to
support the verdict. Pelley v. State, 901 N.E.2d 494, 500 (Ind. 2009); Moore v.
State, 652 N.E.2d 53, 55 (Ind. 1995). In this case, the circumstantial evidence
reveals: (1) specific and continuous satellite location of Hyler’s cell phone that
tracked Landry’s movements contradicted Landry's claim that he only briefly
talked to her at a gas station; (2) the crime scene that was consistent with
Hyler’s cell phone being pulled away from a dash connection; and (3) a picture
of a person with an appearance generally consistent with Landry standing in the
alleyway facing Hyler’s car that Hyler had taken and sent to McMullan.
During his interview with police, Landry stated that he met with Hyler on April
13, 2015 for only five minutes at a Duke Gas Station, went to pick up his
daughter from Head Start and then went home to get his oldest daughter from
the school bus. Tr. Vol. 4 at 171, 175; State’s Ex. 91. However, Hyler’s GPS on
her phone indicated that she never stopped at the Duke Gas Station, but moved
right past the Duke Gas Station to the middle of the alley in the 300 block of
Holliday Street where she was later found dead. The text messages and calls in
which Hyler provided her current whereabouts to Landry and Hyler’s Facebook
messages to McMullen, stating, “He is following me now”—were sufficient for
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 46A03-1710-CR-2373 | June 11, 2018 Page 10 of 12
the jury to infer that Landry and Hyler did not meet at the Duke Gas Station,
but instead, met in the alley in the 300 block of Holliday Street where, shortly
thereafter, she was killed by Landry.
The crime scene indicated that Hyler’s cell phone was taken by the person who
killed her. Utilizing GPS data on the phone, Landry’s location was established.
It indicated that Hyler’s phone went from the crime scene, to the Head Start
program, Hearts & Hands childcare, and Landry’s residence on Walker Street.
Google’s GPS services showed Hyler’s phone traveling north and south on
Tilden Avenue. Surveillance footage from 801 Tilden Avenue showed
Landry’s car traveling north and south on Tilden with no other vehicles
following him. This evidence was sufficient for the jury to reasonably infer that
Landry murdered Hyler and took her phone.
Furthermore, the evidence was sufficient for the jury to reasonably infer that the
picture that Hyler sent to McMullan just before her death was Landry. The
picture showed a person with an appearance consistent with Landry standing in
the alleyway facing Hyler’s car. When Landry was interviewed by the police,
he was dressed in similar clothing to what the individual from the picture was
wearing: grey hat; zip-up sweatshirt; and a grey t-shirt.
The evidence directly supported the verdict of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt
and was sufficient to support Landry’s conviction.
Affirmed.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 46A03-1710-CR-2373 | June 11, 2018 Page 11 of 12
Baker, J., and Bradford, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 46A03-1710-CR-2373 | June 11, 2018 Page 12 of 12