Carpenter v. State, 49S00-8705-CR-464

• Decision Date: 24 May 1988
• Docket Number: No. 49S00-8705-CR-464,49S00-8705-CR-464
• Citation: 523 N.E.2d 407
• Parties: David L. CARPENTER, Appellant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee.
• Court: Indiana Supreme Court

Page 407

523 N.E.2d 407

David L. CARPENTER, Appellant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee.

No. 49S00-8705-CR-464.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

May 24, 1988.

Aaron E. Haith, Choate Visher & Haith, Indianapolis, for appellant.

Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen., Gary Damon Secrest, Deputy Atty. Gen., Indianapolis, for appellee.

GIVAN, Justice.

A jury trial resulted in a conviction of appellant of Child Molesting, a Class B felony, and Child Molesting, a Class C felony. On the Class B felony, appellant was sentenced to twelve (12) years and on the Class C felony he was sentenced to five (5) years, the sentences to run concurrently.

The facts are: On the evening of June 18, 1986, appellant and Bobby Williams went to the apartment of the victim's mother for a social drink. While the three adults were having drinks in the living room, the 11-year-old victim entered the room and asked her mother to read her a bedtime story. The mother replied that she would read to the child as soon as her guests had left.

Appellant offered to tell the victim a bedtime story and went back to her bedroom. After shutting the door halfway and turning off the light, appellant sat on the bed and told the child a story. When he finished the story, appellant pulled the child's nightgown up and her panties down and put his face in her vaginal area. He licked her vaginal area several times then sucked on her breasts. While appellant was committing the acts, he was on his knees on the floor and had his hand over the child's mouth. Appellant then asked the victim to perform oral sex upon him and she shook her head no. Appellant told the victim he would give her $2.00 if she would not tell on him.

As appellant rose from his kneeling position, the mother opened the door and walked into the room. She had noticed that the light was off and had come to investigate. Appellant stated that he had done nothing to the victim, then rushed out of the room turning on the light as he left. The child then told her mother what had happened, and the mother went into the living room and confronted appellant.

The mother's downstairs neighbors, Cheryl Pierson and Donald Hasson, came to the mother's apartment that evening. When they entered the living room, they saw appellant coming toward the living room from the hallway. They also saw the mother go back to the child's bedroom after appellant was in the living room. While the mother confronted appellant, both the child and her brother came out to the living room. After a few minutes, all guests left the apartment.

Appellant claims the evidence is insufficient to sustain his conviction. Appellant acknowledges that this Court will not reweigh the evidence. He takes the position that the evidence is insufficient because the only direct evidence presented by the State is the testimony of the victim. Both the child and her mother testified that appellant was still in the bedroom at the time the mother entered. Appellant relies on the testimony of guests who stated that appellant was in the living room by the time the child called for her mother.

Appellant claims the witnesses remained firm in this position; an examination of the record, however, shows that they were in fact confused as to the sequence of events. All of this was submitted to the jury for their consideration. We see no reason to invade the province of the jury and reassess the evidence. Herrod v. State (1986), Ind., 491 N.E.2d 538.

This Court has repeatedly stated that the uncorroborated testimony of a victim is sufficient to sustain a conviction. Pearson v. State (1985), Ind., 486 N.E.2d 540; Tuggle v. State (1984), Ind.,...