Groce v. State, No. 1067S94

Docket NºNo. 1067S94
Citation250 Ind. 582, 236 N.E.2d 597, 14 Ind.Dec. 233
Case DateMay 13, 1968
CourtSupreme Court of Indiana

Page 597

236 N.E.2d 597
250 Ind. 582
Willie Charles GROCE, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Indiana, Appellee.
No. 1067S94.
Supreme Court of Indiana.
May 13, 1968.
Rehearing Denied June 25, 1968.

[250 Ind. 583]

Page 598

Henry P. Schrenker, Anderson, for appellant.

John J. Dillon, Atty. Gen., Rex P. Killian, Deputy Atty. Gen., for appellee.

MOTE, Judge.

The Appellant was charged by affidavit with inflicting physical injury while committing robbery. The jury found him guilty and the court sentenced the Appellant to life imprisonment in the Indiana State Prison.

The Appellant predicates his appeal on two major propositions:

(1) That the evidence and reasonable inferences drawn therefrom are insufficient to sustain the verdict, and

(2) That where fundamental error is apparent on the face of the record, the Supreme Court will review the entire record even though the alleged errors were not timely objected to on the trial of the cause nor specified in the Motion for New Trial.

The evidence most favorable to the State reveals the following: The victim, Mrs. Blanche K. Bing, lived at 2412 Nichol Avenue, Anderson, Indiana, on September 1, 1966. She had gone to the store between 11:00 and 11:30 o'clock in the [250 Ind. 584] morning and arrived home between 11:30 and noon. She entered her house and went into the kitchen and was preparing to put water on the stove when she was attacked from the rear. In the struggle, she was cut on the neck and on the hand. Mrs. Bing was able to say only that the man was colored and his build 'was familiar' to that of the Appellant. She further testified that she had left her purse on the dining room table about ten or twelve feet from the kitchen. The assailant had a knife, which was found later by the police and found not to belong to Mrs. Bing.

Appellant argues first that there was insufficient evidence of identification that he was the assailant. There appears to be no probative value to the identification by Mrs. Bing of the Appellant as the man who attacked her. A neighbor, when asked if she saw the Appellant run from the Bing residence, said: 'I believe I did, yes'. There was some testimony by witnesses that the man who fled from the home had 'shiny, slicked down hair' and a police officer who knew the Appellant testified he had processed hair which was shiny and that it was in the same condition when he was arrested.

Page 599

Without more evidence, Appellant's contention that this was insufficient identification would have merit. However, further testimony reveals that entrance to the house had been gained through a basement window and the police found a print of a left index finger on a piece of broken glass from this window. This print was taken to the Identification Supervisor at the Indiana State Police Headquarters and was identified as matching the print on Appellant's identification card. It is well established that this Court on review does not weigh the evidence, but determines if there was evidence presented of probative value which would justify as a matter of law a finding of guilty by the jury. Christen v. State (1950) 228 Ind. 30, 89 N.E.2d 445; Baker v. State (1956) 236 Ind. 55, 138 N.E.2d 641.

We find...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 practice notes
  • Wilson v. State, No. 4-784A201
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • December 26, 1984
    ...denied a defendant a fair trial, that error is not waived for failure to preserve it in a motion to correct error. Groce v. State (1968), 250 Ind. 582, 236 N.E.2d 597; Hayden v. State (1964), 245 Ind. 591, 199 N.E.2d 102, cert. denied (1966), 384 U.S. 1013, 86 S.Ct. 1926, 16 L.Ed.2d 1034. T......
  • Lane v. State, No. 1180S424
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • December 3, 1981
    ...question of the sufficiency of the evidence, it could be said that the "taking" was from the presence of Rogers. Groce v. State, (1968) 250 Ind. 582, 236 N.E.2d 597; Paulson v. State, (1979) Ind.App., 393 N.E.2d 211. Those decisions were predicated upon the rationale that "presence" is broa......
  • Hardin v. State, No. 372A124
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • September 22, 1972
    ...Ware v. State (1963), 243 Ind. 639, 189 N.E.2d 704; McMinoway v. State (1972), Ind.App., 283 N.E.2d 553. Compare Groce v. State (1968), 250 Ind. 582, 236 N.E.2d 597 and Leitner v. State (1967), 248 Ind. 381, 229 N.E.2d 459. EVIDENCE OF ALIBI DOES NOT RENDER CONTRARY TESTIMONY LEGALLY INSUFF......
  • Smith v. State, No. 767S44
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • July 15, 1969
    ...raised in the motion for new trial and the assigned error that the Court erred in overruling the same. Groce v. State (1968), Ind., 14 Ind.Dec. 233, 236 N.E.2d 597; Rule 2--6, Rules Indiana Supreme [252 Ind. 429] In the Groce case this Court recognized an exception to the foregoing rule, ci......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
10 cases
  • Wilson v. State, No. 4-784A201
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • December 26, 1984
    ...denied a defendant a fair trial, that error is not waived for failure to preserve it in a motion to correct error. Groce v. State (1968), 250 Ind. 582, 236 N.E.2d 597; Hayden v. State (1964), 245 Ind. 591, 199 N.E.2d 102, cert. denied (1966), 384 U.S. 1013, 86 S.Ct. 1926, 16 L.Ed.2d 1034. T......
  • Lane v. State, No. 1180S424
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • December 3, 1981
    ...question of the sufficiency of the evidence, it could be said that the "taking" was from the presence of Rogers. Groce v. State, (1968) 250 Ind. 582, 236 N.E.2d 597; Paulson v. State, (1979) Ind.App., 393 N.E.2d 211. Those decisions were predicated upon the rationale that "presence" is broa......
  • Hardin v. State, No. 372A124
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • September 22, 1972
    ...Ware v. State (1963), 243 Ind. 639, 189 N.E.2d 704; McMinoway v. State (1972), Ind.App., 283 N.E.2d 553. Compare Groce v. State (1968), 250 Ind. 582, 236 N.E.2d 597 and Leitner v. State (1967), 248 Ind. 381, 229 N.E.2d 459. EVIDENCE OF ALIBI DOES NOT RENDER CONTRARY TESTIMONY LEGALLY INSUFF......
  • Smith v. State, No. 767S44
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • July 15, 1969
    ...raised in the motion for new trial and the assigned error that the Court erred in overruling the same. Groce v. State (1968), Ind., 14 Ind.Dec. 233, 236 N.E.2d 597; Rule 2--6, Rules Indiana Supreme [252 Ind. 429] In the Groce case this Court recognized an exception to the foregoing rule, ci......
  • 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