Adetokunbo v. State, No. 49A02–1407–CR–511.

Docket NºNo. 49A02–1407–CR–511.
Citation29 N.E.3d 1277
Case DateApril 27, 2015
CourtCourt of Appeals of Indiana

29 N.E.3d 1277

Adegoke ADETOKUNBO aka Robert Adesanoye, and Grace Itaniyi, Appellants–Defendants
v.
STATE of Indiana, Appellee–Plaintiff.

No. 49A02–1407–CR–511.

Court of Appeals of Indiana.

April 27, 2015.


29 N.E.3d 1279

Swaray E. Conteh, The Law Office of Swaray Conteh, LLC, Indianapolis, IN, Attorney for Appellants.

Gregory F. Zoeller, Attorney General of Indiana, Brian Reitz, Deputy Attorney General, Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellee.

ROBB, Judge.

Case Summary and Issues

1] A bench trial was held for Adegoke Adetokunbo and Grace Itaniyi, who were tried as codefendants. Adetokunbo was found guilty of resisting law enforcement, a Class A misdemeanor, and battery, a Class B misdemeanor. Itaniyi was found guilty of resisting law enforcement, a Class A misdemeanor, battery, a Class B misdemeanor, and disorderly conduct, a Class B misdemeanor. Following their convictions and sentence, Adetokunbo and Itaniyi appealed jointly, challenging the sufficiency of evidence supporting their convictions. We conclude there was insufficient evidence to support Itaniyi's conviction for battery, and we remand with instructions that that conviction be vacated. However, we conclude that Itaniyi and Adetokunbo's remaining convictions are supported by sufficient evidence and must be affirmed.

Facts and Procedural History

[2] The facts most favorable to the judgment are as follows. On November 27, 2013, Adetokunbo received a phone call from the Indiana Department of Child Services (“DCS”) requesting that he come to the agency's local office and bring his youngest child. Adetokunbo and Itaniyi, the child's mother, took their child to the DCS office and met with a caseworker who informed them that DCS had received information about possible child abuse and that DCS needed to remove the child from their care.

[3] When the parents were told that DCS was taking their child, Itaniyi became agitated and soon began screaming: “You're not taking my child. You better kill me before you take my child away

[29 N.E.3d 1280

from me.” Transcript at 13. At that point, Luis Flores, a security guard working in the DCS office, called the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department and requested an officer's assistance. Flores prevented Adetokunbo and Itaniyi from leaving, and Officer Perry Renn arrived to assist with removal of the child.

4] Officer Renn approached Itaniyi and told her that she needed to hand her child over to DCS. Itaniyi, who was seated and calm when Officer Renn first approached, refused to give up her child, and she quickly became loud and agitated once again. Itaniyi told Officer Renn that if he wanted to take her child then he would have to arrest her. Officer Renn stepped forward to take the child from Itaniyi, but she pushed him away. Adetokunbo then stood up and started coming toward Officer Renn. Flores stepped between Adetokunbo and Officer Renn, and Adetokunbo punched Flores in the face, knocking off Flores's glasses.

[5] Officer Renn turned to help Flores. Officer Renn approached Adetokunbo and tried to handcuff him, but Adetokunbo pulled his arms away and backed away from Officer Renn. Adetokunbo refused to give Officer Renn his hands, and Officer Renn and Flores had to take Adetokunbo to the ground to subdue him. Once on the ground, Adetokunbo held his arms out in front and stiffened them, making it difficult for Officer Renn to pull Adetokunbo's arms behind his back to handcuff them.

[6] After finally handcuffing Adetokunbo, Officer Renn returned to Itaniyi, who was now screaming. At this time, several people had emerged from their offices to observe the commotion. Officer Renn asked Itaniyi to be quiet multiple times, but she did not comply and continued yelling. Officer Renn placed Itaniyi in handcuffs and placed her on the floor. Once on the floor, Itaniyi continued to yell and attempted to kick Officer Renn. To stop Itaniyi from kicking Officer Renn and Flores, Officer Renn also had to put handcuffs on Itaniyi's feet. Itaniyi did not cease yelling until she was taken outside and put into a police vehicle.

[7] On November 28, 2013, the State charged Adetokunbo with resisting law enforcement, a Class A misdemeanor, and battery, a Class A misdemeanor. The same day, the State charged Itaniyi with resisting law enforcement, a Class A misdemeanor; battery, a Class B misdemeanor; and disorderly conduct, a Class B misdemeanor. A bench trial was held, at which Adetokunbo and Itaniyi were tried as codefendants. Adetokunbo was found guilty of resisting law enforcement as a Class A misdemeanor and battery as a Class B misdemeanor.1 Itaniyi was found guilty of all three counts as charged. Both Adetokunbo and Itaniyi were sentenced to aggregate terms of 365 days with 361 days suspended to probation. This appeal followed.

Discussion and Decision

I. Standard of Review

[8] When reviewing a defendant's claim of insufficient evidence, we will neither reweigh the evidence nor judge the credibility of the witnesses. Bailey v. State, 907 N.E.2d 1003, 1005 (Ind.2009). We consider only the probative evidence and reasonable inferences supporting the trial court's decision. Id. A conviction will be affirmed “if there is substantial evidence of probative value such that a reasonable trier of fact could have concluded the defendant

[29 N.E.3d 1281

was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id.

II. Itaniyi's Convictions

A. Resisting Law Enforcement

[9] First, Itaniyi argues that there was insufficient evidence that she committed the crime of resisting law enforcement. “A person who knowingly or intentionally ... forcibly resists, obstructs, or interferes with a law enforcement officer ... while the officer is lawfully engaged in the execution of the officer's duties ... commits resisting law enforcement....” Ind.Code § 35–44.1–3–1(a)(1). The term “forcibly” is a distinct element of the offense that modifies all three verbs “resists, obstructs, or interferes.” See K.W. v. State, 984 N.E.2d 610, 612 (Ind.2013) (citing Spangler v. State, 607 N.E.2d 720, 723 (Ind.1993) ). Forcible resistance includes “at a minimum, some physical interaction with a law enforcement officer.” Macy v. State, 9 N.E.3d 249, 253 (Ind.Ct.App.2014). Forcible...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 practice notes
  • Johnson v. Rogers, No. 1:16-cv-02705-JMS-MPB
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court (Southern District of Indiana)
    • January 15, 2019
    ...with a law enforcement officer'" presenting a threat of force or "'imminent danger of bodily injury to an officer.'" A.A. v. State, 29 N.E.3d 1277, 1281 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (first quoting K.W. v. State, 984 N.E.2d 610, 612 (Ind. 2013), thenPage 31 quoting Macy v. State, 9 N.E.3d 249, 253 (......
  • United States v. Kouttoulas, Case No. 3:12-CR-048 JD
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court of Northern District of Indiana
    • April 19, 2016
    ...another person, since "evidence of touching, however slight, is sufficient to support a conviction for battery." Adetokunbo v. Indiana , 29 N.E.3d 1277, 1281 (Ind.Ct.App.2015). Both Ms. Sullivan and Mr. Russell also testified that Mr. Kouttoulas was quite angry and aggressive at the time, w......
  • Ervin v. State, Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-965
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • November 28, 2018
    ...v. State, 725 N.E.2d 837, 840 (Ind. 2000). We neither reweigh the evidence nor judge the credibility of the witnesses. A.A. v. State , 29 N.E.3d 1277, 1280 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015). We consider only the probative evidence and reasonable inferences supporting the trial court's decision. Id. "A c......
  • Wolf v. State, Court of Appeals Case No. 10A01-1607-CR-1560
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • May 5, 2017
    ...State, 725 N.E.2d 837, 840 (Ind. 2000). We neither reweigh the evidence nor judge the credibility of the witnesses. Adetokunbo v. State , 29 N.E.3d 1277, 1280 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015). We consider only the probative evidence and reasonable inferences supporting the trial court's decision. Id. "......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
14 cases
  • Johnson v. Rogers, No. 1:16-cv-02705-JMS-MPB
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court (Southern District of Indiana)
    • January 15, 2019
    ...with a law enforcement officer'" presenting a threat of force or "'imminent danger of bodily injury to an officer.'" A.A. v. State, 29 N.E.3d 1277, 1281 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (first quoting K.W. v. State, 984 N.E.2d 610, 612 (Ind. 2013), thenPage 31 quoting Macy v. State, 9 N.E.3d 249, 253 (......
  • United States v. Kouttoulas, Case No. 3:12-CR-048 JD
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court of Northern District of Indiana
    • April 19, 2016
    ...another person, since "evidence of touching, however slight, is sufficient to support a conviction for battery." Adetokunbo v. Indiana , 29 N.E.3d 1277, 1281 (Ind.Ct.App.2015). Both Ms. Sullivan and Mr. Russell also testified that Mr. Kouttoulas was quite angry and aggressive at the time, w......
  • Ervin v. State, Court of Appeals Case No. 18A-CR-965
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • November 28, 2018
    ...v. State, 725 N.E.2d 837, 840 (Ind. 2000). We neither reweigh the evidence nor judge the credibility of the witnesses. A.A. v. State , 29 N.E.3d 1277, 1280 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015). We consider only the probative evidence and reasonable inferences supporting the trial court's decision. Id. "A c......
  • Wolf v. State, Court of Appeals Case No. 10A01-1607-CR-1560
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • May 5, 2017
    ...State, 725 N.E.2d 837, 840 (Ind. 2000). We neither reweigh the evidence nor judge the credibility of the witnesses. Adetokunbo v. State , 29 N.E.3d 1277, 1280 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015). We consider only the probative evidence and reasonable inferences supporting the trial court's decision. Id. "......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT