Dillon Trumpey v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

MEMORANDUM DECISION
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), FILED
this Memorandum Decision shall not be Nov 06 2017, 9:15 am
regarded as precedent or cited before any CLERK
court except for the purpose of establishing Indiana Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
the defense of res judicata, collateral and Tax Court
estoppel, or the law of the case.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Barbara J. Simmons Curtis T. Hill, Jr.
Oldenburg, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana
Angela N. Sanchez
Supervising Deputy Attorney
General
Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE
COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Dillon Trumpey, November 6, 2017
Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No.
49A05-1704-CR-666
v. Appeal from the Marion Superior
Court
State of Indiana, The Honorable Linda Brown,
Appellee-Plaintiff. Judge
Trial Court Cause No.
49G10-1610-CM-39980
Robb, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A05-1704-CR-666 | November 6, 2017 Page 1 of 4
Case Summary and Issue
[1] Following a bench trial, Dillon Trumpey was convicted of theft, a Class A
misdemeanor. On appeal, Trumpey challenges whether the State presented
sufficient evidence to support his conviction. Concluding the State presented
sufficient evidence, we affirm.
Facts and Procedural History
[2] On October 10, 2016, Eric Brumlee was working as a store clerk at Inside
Scoop Candies and Gifts at Castleton Square Mall. Brumlee was the only
employee in the store. While he was working at the cash register, Brumlee
observed a male customer, later identified as Trumpey, take several stuffed
animals from a display near the entrance of the store. Specifically, Brumlee saw
Trumpey take a large husky stuffed animal and leave the store without paying.
Trumpey was accompanied by a female and Brumlee observed them walk
quickly toward Sears. Brumlee called the police and described the perpetrator
as a tall, white male with blonde hair and wearing a gray beany.
[3] Following Brumlee’s report, Officer Marcus Riley of the Indianapolis
Metropolitan Police Department was dispatched to Castleton Square Mall.
Officer Riley found Trumpey inside Sears and detained him. Trumpey
possessed a stuffed animal and his female companion had the large husky
stuffed animal. Officer Riley escorted Trumpey and his companion back to
Inside Scoop Candies and Gifts where Brumlee identified them as the pair that
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A05-1704-CR-666 | November 6, 2017 Page 2 of 4
stole merchandise from the store. Trumpey admitted to Officer Riley that he
stole the merchandise, but later recanted his confession.
[4] The State charged Trumpey with theft, a Class A misdemeanor. At trial,
Trumpey testified and denied stealing merchandise or ever being present at
Inside Scoop Candies and Gifts. Trumpey also stated a friend who was with
his group at the mall “looks just like [Trumpey] . . . .” Transcript at 41. The
trial court found Trumpey guilty as charged. Trumpey now appeals.
Discussion and Decision
I. Standard of Review
[5] Our standard of review in claims of insufficient evidence is well settled: we
neither reweigh the evidence nor judge the credibility of the witnesses, and we
consider only the evidence most favorable to the verdict and the reasonable
inferences that can be drawn from this evidence. Knight v. State, 42 N.E.3d 990,
993 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015). We will not disturb the verdict if substantial evidence
of probative value supports it. Id. As an appellate court, we respect the trier-of-
fact’s exclusive province to weigh conflicting evidence. Id.
II. Sufficiency of the Evidence
[6] Trumpey argues the State failed to present sufficient evidence to prove beyond a
reasonable doubt that Trumpey committed theft. To convict Trumpey of theft,
the State was required to prove that Trumpey “knowingly or intentionally
exert[ed] unauthorized control over property of another person, with intent to
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A05-1704-CR-666 | November 6, 2017 Page 3 of 4
deprive the other person of any part of its value or use . . . .” Ind. Code § 35-43-
4-2(a) (2014).
[7] The State’s evidence established that Brumlee witnessed Trumpey and a female
companion in Inside Scoop Candies and Gifts. While working behind the cash
register, Brumlee observed Trumpey take merchandise, specifically a large
husky stuffed animal, and leave without paying. The police then apprehended
Trumpey, who fit the description given to them by Brumlee. Trumpey’s
companion possessed a large husky stuffed animal. Brumlee later identified
Trumpey as the person who stole the stuffed animals from the store and
Trumpey admitted to Officer Riley that he stole them. Trumpey’s argument
that we should credit his testimony that he was in “the wrong place at the
wrong time with the wrong person,” tr. at 11, is merely a request to reweigh the
evidence, which we cannot do. Knight, 42 N.E.3d at 993. The trial court
weighed the evidence and credited Brumlee’s testimony that he witnessed
Trumpey take merchandise without paying for it. This is sufficient evidence to
support Trumpey’s conviction for theft.
Conclusion
[8] The State presented sufficient evidence to support Trumpey’s conviction for
theft. Accordingly, we affirm his conviction.
[9] Affirmed.
Riley, J., and Pyle, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A05-1704-CR-666 | November 6, 2017 Page 4 of 4