Andre Chandler v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) ( 2020 )

MEMORANDUM DECISION
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D),
this Memorandum Decision shall not be FILED
regarded as precedent or cited before any Oct 30 2020, 8:28 am
court except for the purpose of establishing CLERK
the defense of res judicata, collateral Indiana Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
estoppel, or the law of the case. and Tax Court
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Valerie K. Boots Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
Darren Bedwell Attorney General of Indiana
Marion County Public Defender Agency Megan M. Smith
Appellate Division Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Andre Chandler, October 30, 2020
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
20A-CR-826
v. Appeal from the
Marion Superior Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable
Appellee-Plaintiff. Stanley E. Kroh, Magistrate
Trial Court Cause No.
49G03-1804-F1-12451
Kirsch, Judge.
[1] Andre Chandler (“Chandler”) was convicted after a jury trial of three counts of
child molesting as Level 1 felonies and five counts of child molesting as Level 4
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-CR-826 | October 30, 2020 Page 1 of 3
felonies. Chandler now appeals two of his convictions for Level 4 felony child
molesting, contending that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to
support his conviction under Original Count 9 (“Jury Count 8”),1 or in the
alternative, that his convictions for the two challenged Level 4 felony
convictions violated double jeopardy.2 The State agrees that the evidence at
trial was insufficient to support Chandler’s conviction for Jury Count 8. At
trial, when the State asked the victim where Chandler had touched her, the
victim replied “his hand -- his hand -- his hand, like -- it touched my -- (witness
crying).” Tr. Vol. II at 186. When the State attempted to clarify which part of
her body Chandler had touched, the victim responded “[m]y -- shoulder was,
uh . . . .” Id. However, the victim was crying so intensely that the State
requested a brief recess. Id. Later, after her testimony resumed, the State
asked the victim if Chandler ever touched her anywhere else, and she testified
that he “touched [her] chest one time” and gestured toward her “upper torso.”
Id. at 194. The victim clarified that she was referring to her breasts. Id. Based
on the record, we agree with the parties and conclude that this testimony did
not reflect that Chandler fondled the victim’s breasts on more than one
occasion. We, therefore, conclude that Chandler’s conviction under Jury
Count 8 was not supported by sufficient evidence, and we reverse his conviction
1
The challenged conviction was originally charged under Count 9, but later, several counts were dismissed,
and, at trial, the counts were renumbered, and the challenged conviction became Jury Count 8.
2
Because we conclude that Chandler’s Level 4 child-molesting conviction from Jury Count 8 should be
vacated, it is unnecessary to address Chandler’s double-jeopardy argument.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-CR-826 | October 30, 2020 Page 2 of 3
for Level 4 felony child molesting under Jury Count 8. We remand to the trial
court with instructions to vacate the judgment of conviction for child molesting
as a Level 4 felony from Jury Count 8.
[2] Reversed and remanded.
Pyle, J., and Tavitas, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-CR-826 | October 30, 2020 Page 3 of 3