Dennis Knight v. State of Indiana ( 2014 )

Pursuant to Ind.Appellate Rule 65(D),
this Memorandum Decision shall not
be regarded as precedent or cited
before any court except for the purpose
of establishing the defense of res
Mar 25 2014, 10:13 am
judicata, collateral estoppel, or the law
of the case.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE:
PHILIP R. SKODINSKI GREGORY F. ZOELLER
South Bend, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana
JAMES B. MARTIN
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
DENNIS KNIGHT, )
)
Appellant-Defendant, )
)
vs. ) No. 71A04-1309-CR-475
)
STATE OF INDIANA, )
)
Appellee-Plaintiff. )
APPEAL FROM THE ST. JOSEPH SUPERIOR COURT
The Honorable Jerome Frese, Judge
Cause No. 71D02-1109-FB-147
March 25, 2014
MEMORANDUM DECISION – NOT FOR PUBLICATION
BARNES, Judge
Case Summary
Dennis Knight appeals his conviction for one count of Class B felony robbery.
We affirm.
Issue
Knight raises one issue, which we restate as whether the State presented sufficient
evidence to establish his identity.
Facts
On August 16, 2011, Sabrina Wills was working at a gas station in South Bend.
While she was restocking cigarettes, a man walked in and asked for a Black and Mild.
Wills turned around to retrieve the cigar, and when she turned around, the man was
armed with a gun and holding a plastic grocery bag. The man demanded “the money and
everything under the drawer.” Tr. p. 33. The man took the money, and Wills called 911.
When police arrived, Wills described the perpetrator to police. Wills later identified
Knight in a photo array as the man who robbed her.
The State charged Knight with five counts of Class B felony robbery. Four of the
counts related to other incidents, and Count V related to this incident. Knight was tried
separately on this count. Although Knight was not present at his jury trial, the jury found
him guilty of the Class B felony robbery charge. Knight now appeals.
Analysis
Knight argues that there is insufficient evidence to establish his identity. When
reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we neither reweigh the evidence
nor assess the credibility of witnesses. Bailey v. State, 979 N.E.2d 133, 135 (Ind. 2012).
2
We view the evidence—even if conflicting—and all reasonable inferences drawn from it
in a light most favorable to the conviction and affirm if there is substantial evidence of
probative value supporting each element of the crime from which a reasonable trier of
fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Id.Wills described the perpetrator’s race, height, weight, age, clothing, and general
appearance to police within ten minutes of the robbery. Although the perpetrator was
wearing a hat, surveillance video confirmed Wills’s general description of the robber, and
this video was shown to the jury. Wills also gave the same description to police several
days later when she identified Knight in a photo array as the perpetrator.
At trial, Wills testified she was 100% certain that the person she identified in the
photo array was the man who robbed her. Wills also testified that she was one and one-
half feet from the robber, that there was nothing obstructing her view of him, and that he
was the only other person in the store. She explained that, although she avoided looking
him in the eyes too long, she saw his face. She testified that his hat did not obstruct her
view of his forehead, eyes, mouth, and chin. Because Knight was not present at the trial,
the State used his booking photo to identify him at trial, and Wills testified that the
person in that photo was the same person who robbed her.
Knight basically argues that Wills’s identification of him was unreliable because
she was scared during the robbery. This is nothing more than a request to reweigh the
evidence. We cannot do this. There is sufficient evidence to establish that Knight
committed the robbery.
3
Conclusion
The State presented sufficient evidence to establish Knight’s identity at trial. We
affirm.
Affirmed.
ROBB, J., and BROWN, J., concur.
4