Brewster v. State
Decision Date | 16 July 1998 |
Docket Number | No. 43A03-9708-CR-298,43A03-9708-CR-298 |
Citation | 697 N.E.2d 95 |
Parties | Christopher A. BREWSTER, Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff. |
Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
After a jury trial, Christopher A. Brewster was convicted of theft and burglary. On appeal, he claims that he was denied effective assistance of counsel based on his trial counsel's failure to present potential alibi witnesses.
We affirm.
Brewster argues that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to secure the testimony of three potential alibi witnesses, Alma Caudill, Cleon Napier, and Geneva Napier. In an appendix to his appellate brief, Brewster submits unsigned affidavit forms in support of his contention that Caudill and the Napiers would have testified that Brewster was in Kentucky at the time the burglary took place.
The proper procedure for making a challenge to a judgment involving evidence not in the record was recently set out in Lee v. State, 694 N.E.2d 719 (Ind.1998). In Lee, the defendant contended that he was denied effective assistance of counsel because his trial counsel did not present witnesses at trial who could have corroborated his alibi defense. The State argued that Lee's self-serving, unsworn assertions were the only evidence that any such alibi witnesses existed and that the assertions were therefore insufficient to preserve Lee's claim. The supreme court agreed, noting that it is the defendant's duty to present the court with an adequate record on appeal and when the defendant fails to do so, the issue is deemed waived. Id. at 721 n. 6.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Attebury v. State
...v. State, 694 N.E.2d 719, 721 n. 6 (Ind.1998), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 119 S.Ct. 554, --- L.Ed.2d ---- (1998); Brewster v. State, 697 N.E.2d 95, 96 (Ind.Ct.App.1998). This procedure for developing a record for appeal is more commonly known as the Davis/Hatton procedure. See Hatton v. S......
-
DDK v. State
...the error, if any, affected the result. This court has no ability to engage in fact-finding or take new evidence. See Brewster v. State, 697 N.E.2d 95, 96 (Ind.Ct.App.1998) (not proper function of appellate court to receive and weigh In these circumstances, the proper procedure, which has b......
-
In re Paternity of P.W.J.
...typed the affidavit and, thus, it does not constitute competent evidence under Indiana Trial Rule 11.3 See, e.g., Brewster v. State, 697 N.E.2d 95, 96 (Ind. Ct.App.1998) (holding that the affidavits submitted by a criminal defendant, which were not signed, do not constitute admissible evide......
-
Harrold v. State
...support of his PCR petition, but one of them was unsigned. Unsigned affidavits do not constitute admissible evidence. Brewster v. State, 697 N.E.2d 95, 96 (Ind.Ct.App.1998). We will consider only Harrold's signed affidavit and that of his mother. 4. Harrold cites material outside the record......