Bryant v. State
| Decision Date | 07 August 2015 |
| Docket Number | No. 90A04–1501–CR–11.,90A04–1501–CR–11. |
| Citation | 41 N.E.3d 1031 |
| Parties | Timothy H. BRYANT, Appellant–Defendant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee–Plaintiff. |
| Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
Jeremy K. Nix, Matheny, Hahn, Denman & Nix, L.L.P., Huntington, IN, Attorney for Appellant.
Gregory F. Zoeller, Attorney General of Indiana, Larry D. Allen, Deputy Attorney General, Indianapolis, IN, Attorneys for Appellee.
[1] In 2013, Appellant–Defendant Timothy Bryant owned and operated Summit City North West All Products (“Summit City”), a pawnshop in Fort Wayne, Allen County. Bryant was required by local ordinance to upload records of every item purchased by him or pawned at Summit City to LEADS, an online database established to facilitate the recovery of stolen goods. In September of 2013, authorities received a tip regarding a series of thefts, which led to Isaiah Burnau, who was found to have pawned a stolen chainsaw at another Fort Wayne pawnshop. The investigation soon led to Kristy Coverdale and Tony Haney. As it turned out, several items had been stolen in Wells County and pawned at Summit City and other pawnshops. It was also discovered that none of the items purchased from Isaiah, Coverdale, or Haney had been uploaded to LEADS. Appellee–Plaintiff the State of Indiana charged Bryant in Wells County with several crimes, and he was ultimately convicted of two counts of Class D felony aiding, inducing, or causing receiving stolen property and Class C felony corrupt business influence. Bryant contends that the trial court abused its discretion in denying his mistrial motion based on alleged prosecutorial misconduct and that the State failed to establish venue in Wells County. We affirm.
[2] In September of 2013, Bryant owned Summit City, a pawnshop in Fort Wayne. Pursuant to Fort Wayne ordinance, Bryant was required to collect and, within twenty-four hours, upload information regarding any item sold or pawned to LEADS. Also in September of 2013, the authorities received a report from Keith and Debra Burnau that items had been stolen from their home and homes of their relatives. The Burnaus believed that their grandson Isaiah had been stealing from the homes with the help of Haney and Coverdale.
[3] Wells County Sheriff's Detective Diane Betz was assigned the case and checked the LEADS database to see if Isaiah, Haney, or Coverdale had recently sold items to pawn shops. Detective Betz discovered that Isaiah had recently sold a chainsaw that had been reported stolen to a Cash America pawnshop in Fort Wayne. Detective Betz interviewed Isaiah, who admitted that he and Coverdale had sold stolen items at pawnshops, including stereo equipment from a car and a train set from a house in Wells County. Isaiah admitted to selling stolen goods at least a dozen times at Summit City. Detective Betz searched LEADS again but did not find any record of the stolen items.
[4] Detective Betz also interviewed Coverdale, who admitted that she had driven Isaiah and Haney from Wells County to Summit City to sell stolen goods. At the time of the thefts, Coverdale was in a sexual relationship with Bryant, and the two were in frequent contact by telephone and text message. Coverdale sold stolen stereo equipment to Bryant at Summit City. Bryant told Coverdale that he knew the stereo items were stolen but that “he would take care of it” by “get[ting] rid of [her] LEADS.” Tr. p. 289.
[5] Detective Betz also interviewed Haney. Haney admitted that he had stolen the trains from a home where his mother worked as a housekeeper and sold them to Summit City. Haney told Detective Betz that he, Coverdale, and Isaiah took carloads of stolen goods to Summit City and sold them. Detective Betz found that the trains were being sold by Summit City on eBay.
[6] Detective Betz contacted Fort Wayne Police Detective Joseph Lyons, who specialized in pawnshops. Detectives Betz and Lyons went to Summit City and asked employee Thomas Skinner if Summit City had any Pioneer stereo equipment for sale. Skinner directed the detectives to equipment that matched the description of equipment that had been stolen in Wells County. The Detectives also found several collector train engines at Summit City. When the detectives examined Summit City's sales records, they found records of sales by Haney, Coverdale, and Isaiah, none of which had been uploaded to LEADS. When confronted with the discrepancy, Bryant claimed that he did not believe he had to upload information about the items to LEADS because they were not worth enough. There are, in fact, no exceptions made in the LEADS ordinance for items of low value.
[7] On February 19, 2014, the State filed seven charges against Bryant: two counts of Class D felony aiding, inducing, or causing theft; two counts of Class D felony aiding, inducing, or causing receiving stolen property; two counts of Class D felony conspiracy to commit receiving stolen property; and Class C felony corrupt business influence.
[8] Bryant's trial was held October 29 through 31, 2014. During trial, Bryant called Skinner as a witness. Bryant offered into evidence Defendant's Exhibit A, which consisted of Summit City sales records involving Coverdale, Haney, Isaiah, Randy Haney, and Elizabeth Haney.1 Skinner testified that he had had difficulties uploading transaction information to LEADS. During cross-examination, the prosecutor asked Skinner why certain purchases from Haney, Coverdale, and Isaiah were not uploaded to LEADS, Skinner reiterated that he had had problems with LEADS:
Tr. p. 463 (emphasis added). The trial court also instructed the jury that “[t]he burden of proof is upon the State to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant is guilty of the crime charged.” Tr. p. 463.
[10] Following trial, a jury found Bryant guilty of two counts of aiding, inducing, or causing receiving stolen property and corrupt business influence. On November 24, 2014, the trial court sentenced Bryant to an aggregate sentence of four years of incarceration.
Discussion and Decision
[11] Bryant contends that the trial court abused its discretion in denying his mistrial motion based on alleged prosecutorial misconduct.
To support a motion for mistrial based upon prosecutorial misconduct, the defense must show that the prosecutor's actions constituted misconduct by reference to established norms of professional conduct, and that the ensuing prejudice placed him in a position of grave peril to which he should not have been subjected. Maldonado v. State (1976), 265 Ind. 492, 355 N.E.2d 843. Whether the misconduct results in grave peril is determined not by the degree of impropriety involved, but by its probable persuasive effect upon the jury. Id.; Andrews v. State (1989), Ind., 536 N.E.2d 507. This effect, in turn, is assessed not by whether its absence conclusively would lead to an acquittal; rather, reversal is required where the evidence is close and the trial court fails to alleviate the prejudicial effect. Johnson v. State (1983), Ind.App., 453 N.E.2d 365. Even where an isolated instance of misconduct does not establish grave peril, if repeated instances evidence a deliberate attempt to improperly prejudice the defendant, a reversal still may result. Robinson v. State (1973), 260 Ind. 517, 297 N.E.2d 409.
Everroad v. State, 571 N.E.2d 1240, 1244 (Ind.1991).
[12] Bryant argues essentially that the prosecutor's comment shifted the burden to him to establish his innocence by producing documentary evidence that the problems uploading information to LEADS were real. While “[i]t is improper for a prosecutor to suggest that a defendant shoulders the burden of proof in a criminal case[,]” Stephenson v. State, 742 N.E.2d 463, 483 (Ind.2001), no such suggestion was made or implied. Bryant called Skinner in an attempt to establish, inter alia, that records of purchases from the Haneys, Coverdale, and Isaiah were not uploaded to LEADS due to technical issues. This evidence contradicted testimony the State presented from Detective Lyons that during his investigation nobody at Summit City ever blamed technical difficulties for their failure to upload records. Even assuming that Defendant's Exhibit A bolstered Skinner's testimony (which is a generous assumption), the prosecutor's comment was merely a statement on evidence that Bryant himself introduced. We conclude that, far from improper burden-shifting, this was permissible impeachment of a defense witness, arising from evidence the defendant introduced. See Lopez v. State, 527 N.E.2d 1119, 1127 (Ind...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Baxter v. Brown
...are based on reasons which arise from the evidence." Lopez v. State, 527 N.E.2d 1119, 1127 (Ind. 1988); see Bryant v. State, 41 N.E.3d 1031, 1036 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015). The Baxter II court assessed each of the three statements—"that makes her more credible," "these guys are credible over her......
-
Hessler v. State
... ... [Defense Counsel]: Objection; burden shifting ... Tr. Vol. 9 pp. 99-100 ... [¶31] ... "It is improper for a prosecutor to suggest that a ... defendant shoulders the burden of proof in a criminal ... case." Bryant v. State , 41 N.E.3d 1031, 1035 ... (Ind.Ct.App. 2015) (citing Stephenson v. State, 742 ... N.E.2d 463, 483 (Ind. 2001), cert. denied ). In ... making the challenged statement, the State was commenting on ... the evidence that Hessler presented in his own defense. In ... ...
-
Perry v. State
...which support the conclusion of requisite venue." Id . Venue may be established by circumstantial evidence. Bryant v. State , 41 N.E.3d 1031, 1037 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015). "[T]he State meets its burden of establishing venue if the facts and circumstances permit the trier of fact to infer that ......
-
Kinnaman v. State
...only prove venue by a preponderance of the evidence. Baugh v. State , 801 N.E.2d 629, 631 (Ind. 2004) ; see also Bryant v. State , 41 N.E.3d 1031, 1037 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (stating that the State's burden of proof may be satisfied with circumstantial evidence). We treat a claim of insuffic......