Duffy v. State, No. 780S206

Docket NºNo. 780S206
Citation275 Ind. 191, 415 N.E.2d 715
Case DateFebruary 04, 1981
CourtSupreme Court of Indiana

Page 715

415 N.E.2d 715
275 Ind. 191
William J. DUFFY, Appellant (Defendant below),
v.
STATE of Indiana, Appellee (Plaintiff below).
No. 780S206.
Supreme Court of Indiana.
Feb. 4, 1981.

[275 Ind. 192]

Page 716

William J. Dougherty, Indianapolis, for appellant.

Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen., Frederick N. Kopec, Deputy Atty. Gen., Indianapolis, for appellee.

HUNTER, Justice.

The defendant, William J. Duffy, was convicted in a bench trial of rape, a class B felony, Ind. Code § 35-42-4-1 (Burns 1979 Repl.) and criminal deviate conduct, a class B felony, Ind. Code § 35-42-4-2 (Burns 1979 Repl.). He was sentenced to two concurrent terms of fifteen years each. His direct appeal raises the following issues:

1. Whether there was sufficient evidence to sustain the convictions; and

2. Whether the findings and decision of the trial court were contrary to law in that defendant was so intoxicated on the day of the crime he was not able to form the necessary specific intent.

A summary of the facts most favorable to the state shows that on [275 Ind. 193] the afternoon of June 27, 1979, the victim, a seventy-eight year old widow, was watching television in her unlocked apartment. A man entered the apartment suddenly and threatened her with a knife. The man was described by the victim as a white male in his mid-forties wearing a white tee-shirt, pants, and dark socks without shoes. He pulled her to the floor, threatened several times to kill her and both raped her and had oral sex with her. During the rape, the man dropped the knife which police later recovered. After raping the victim, the man grabbed some loose change from the top of the victim's dresser and ran down the hall. The victim went to her door and screamed for help.

A woman visiting in another apartment near to the victim's apartment saw a man wearing dark socks without shoes, a white tee-shirt and tan pants run down the hallway and get on the elevator shortly after she heard the victim scream. She identified defendant in court as the man she had seen entering the elevator. Another witness had seen defendant with a kitchen knife sticking out of his pocket in the elevator of the apartment building about an hour before the incident.

Defendant was arrested in the apartment building shortly after the incident and was taken to the hospital where the victim was being treated. The victim looked at the defendant from a distance of one to two feet and positively identified him as her assailant. She said, "He had put his shoes on ... but he still got on those black socks." However, eight months later at the trial, the victim was unable to identify defendant in the courtroom. When she was asked if she saw her assailant there, she pointed to a spectator in the back of the room rather than to defendant.

Defendant testified that he was drunk on the day of the offense and that as an alcoholic he was prone to experiencing blackouts when drunk. He testified that he remembered nothing of the alleged crimes and had never to his knowledge raped anyone in his life. Court-appointed psychiatrists

Page 717

testified that defendant was not suffering from a mental disease or defect at the time of the offense and did not lack substantial capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of his actions or conform his conduct to the requirements of law.

[275 Ind. 194] I.

Defendant first contends that there was not sufficient evidence as to his identity to support his convictions. He argues that the identification by the victim in the hospital was made under conditions which were tainted by suggestive circumstances. He alleges that since the victim was unable to identify him in court, and the pretrial identification was made under suggestive circumstances there was insufficient evidence of his identity to sustain his conviction. We do not agree.

It is clear that a one-on-one confrontation between suspect and victim is as a general proposition very suggestive, but it is not always unnecessarily suggestive. Clark v....

To continue reading

Request your trial
24 practice notes
  • Head v. State, No. 780S209
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • December 14, 1982
    ...proper where circumstances Page 56 rendered an alternative approach such as a lineup impossible. See, e.g., Duffy v. State, (1981) Ind., 415 N.E.2d 715 (fact that victim was hospitalized rendered lineup impractical); Swope v. State, (1975) 263 Ind. 148, 325 N.E.2d 193 (fact that hospitalize......
  • Partlow v. State, No. 182S28
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • September 22, 1983
    ...of probative value to support the conclusion of the trier of fact, the judgment will not be overturned. Duffy v. State, (1981) Ind., 415 N.E.2d 715. Furthermore, this Court does not have to find that circumstantial evidence is adequate to overcome every reasonable hypothesis of innocence bu......
  • Brown v. State, No. 181S13
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • December 29, 1982
    ...of the trier of fact, the verdict will not be overturned. Fielden v. State, (1982) Ind., 437 N.E.2d 986; Duffy v. State, (1981) Ind., 415 N.E.2d 715; Wofford v. State, (1979) Ind., 394 N.E.2d A conviction for the crime of rape as a Class A felony requires proof of knowing or intentional sex......
  • Slaton v. State, No. 185S6
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • July 28, 1987
    ...where circumstances rendered an alternative approach such as a line-up impossible." Id. at 55-56 (citing Duffy v. State (1981), Ind., 415 N.E.2d 715; Swope v. State (1975), 263 Ind. 148, 325 N.E.2d In the instant case, police apprehended the defendant within minutes after the second burglar......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
24 cases
  • Head v. State, No. 780S209
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • December 14, 1982
    ...proper where circumstances Page 56 rendered an alternative approach such as a lineup impossible. See, e.g., Duffy v. State, (1981) Ind., 415 N.E.2d 715 (fact that victim was hospitalized rendered lineup impractical); Swope v. State, (1975) 263 Ind. 148, 325 N.E.2d 193 (fact that hospitalize......
  • Partlow v. State, No. 182S28
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • September 22, 1983
    ...of probative value to support the conclusion of the trier of fact, the judgment will not be overturned. Duffy v. State, (1981) Ind., 415 N.E.2d 715. Furthermore, this Court does not have to find that circumstantial evidence is adequate to overcome every reasonable hypothesis of innocence bu......
  • Brown v. State, No. 181S13
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • December 29, 1982
    ...of the trier of fact, the verdict will not be overturned. Fielden v. State, (1982) Ind., 437 N.E.2d 986; Duffy v. State, (1981) Ind., 415 N.E.2d 715; Wofford v. State, (1979) Ind., 394 N.E.2d A conviction for the crime of rape as a Class A felony requires proof of knowing or intentional sex......
  • Slaton v. State, No. 185S6
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • July 28, 1987
    ...where circumstances rendered an alternative approach such as a line-up impossible." Id. at 55-56 (citing Duffy v. State (1981), Ind., 415 N.E.2d 715; Swope v. State (1975), 263 Ind. 148, 325 N.E.2d In the instant case, police apprehended the defendant within minutes after the second burglar......
  • 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