Bridgewater v. State
| Decision Date | 28 October 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 1-682A147,1-682A147 |
| Parties | Bruce E. BRIDGEWATER, Appellant (Defendant Below), v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee (Plaintiff Below). |
| Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
Eric T. Dean, Jr., Crawfordsville, for appellant.
Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen., Carmen L. Quintana, Deputy Atty. Gen., Indianapolis, for appellee.
Bruce E. Bridgewater (Bridgewater) appeals his convictions of attempted escape, resisting law enforcement, and public intoxication.
We affirm.
The record reveals that Bridgewater had been drinking with some friends at two establishments in Crawfordsville. He admitted to consuming a combination of fourteen drinks of tequila and beer. Bridgewater, who claimed to be excessively tired, wandered to the Elston Bank parking lot and entered the hatchback of an automobile, which he thought belonged to his friends. He was mistaken and was found asleep in Lisa Gegner's automobile. She summoned the police, who, after calling to wake Bridgewater, reached into the vehicle and shook him until he awoke.
The officers testified that Bridgewater smelled of alcohol and had trouble standing still. The police transported him to the Montgomery County Jail. Bridgewater insisted upon taking a breathalyzer test which indicated a .123% alcohol level in his blood. (This score exceeds the .10% blood level needed for a conviction under Ind.Code 9-4-1-54.) Upon hearing his test results, Bridgewater conceded to being drunk. Bridgewater was then returned to the drunk tank.
While in the drunk tank, Bridgewater repeatly yelled and requested to use the bathroom until the jailer escorted him to the bathroom, where he left Bridgewater alone momentarily. The jailer returned and began searching for Bridgewater, who had left the bathroom. Bridgewater was discovered in a closet almost eighty feet away from the bathroom. The closet door was pulled closed, but not latched. The jailer and an officer led Bridgewater down the hall. Bridgewater broke away, but was tackled by the officer and put in a restraining hold. As he was led farther down the hall, Bridgewater fell to the floor. He then raised his left arm as if to strike the officer.
The first two issues Bridgewater raises challenge the sufficiency of the evidence. When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, we consider the evidence most favorable to the verdict along with all reasonable inferences which may be drawn from that evidence. If there is substantial evidence of probative value to support each element of the offense, the judgment will be affirmed. McCormick v. State, (1978) Ind.App., 382 N.E.2d 172. Upon review, this court neither weighs the evidence nor judges the credibility of witnesses. Scott v. State, (1980) Ind.App., 404 N.E.2d 1190.
Bridgewater argues the conviction of attempted escape must be reversed because there is no evidence demonstrating his intent to escape and no evidence to show that he tried to escape from the jailhouse. Bridgewater alleges that he was tired and that the drunk tank was cold. He claims that he was disorientated and went into the closet to sleep because it was warm.
The evidence discloses that Bridgewater left the bathroom, he walked approximately eighty feet from the bathroom, proceeded in the opposite direction from the drunk tank, hid in a closet, and upon being apprehended, he broke away from the officers and ran until they caught him. The trier of fact could have reasonably inferred that Bridgewater was hiding in the closet until the appropriate opportunity to escape arose.
Bridgewater also contends the evidence does not support his conviction of resisting law enforcement. Bridgewater asserts that he has chronic shoulder dislocation problems and that the officers dislocated his shoulder. He argues that he was merely defending himself. The evidence most favorable to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
King v. City of Ft. Wayne, Ind.
...Mr. King, standing in his front yard, could be found to be in a public place within the meaning of I.C. 7.1-5-1-3. See Bridgewater v. State, 441 N.E.2d 688 (Ind.App.1982); State v. Culp, 433 N.E.2d 823 (Ind.App.1982); Cornell v. State, 398 N.E.2d 1333, 1339 (Ind.App.1980) (Buchanan, C.J., d......
-
State v. Boucher, 5404
...class, and where that restricted use is strictly enforced. The Indiana Appellate Court faced a similar question in Bridgewater v. State, 441 N.E.2d 688 (Ind.App.1982). In Bridgewater, the defendant was arrested for DUI while parked on a bank's private parking lot. The court in Bridgewater f......
-
Wright v. State
...passenger in a vehicle on a public highway was in a public place for purposes of public intoxication statute); Bridgewater v. State, 441 N.E.2d 688, 690 (Ind.Ct. App.1982) (holding that person who was found drunk in a bank parking lot at night was in a public place), trans. denied; Cornell ......
-
Kelley v. State, 82A04-8912-CR-594
...to prove must be made. Otherwise, neither the Court of Appeals nor the trial court can determine the admissibility. Bridgewater v. State (1982), Ind.App., 441 N.E.2d 688, 690. Carpenter v. State (1988), Ind., 523 N.E.2d 407, 408. Absent an offer to prove, an error in sustaining the objectio......