Reynolds v. State, No. 880S344
| Docket Nº | No. 880S344 |
| Citation | 274 Ind. 221, 409 N.E.2d 639 |
| Case Date | September 26, 1980 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Indiana |
Page 639
v.
STATE of Indiana, Appellee (Plaintiff below).
[274 Ind. 222] Ray Warren Robison, Bedford, for appellant.
Theo. L. Sendak, Atty. Gen., Stephen J. Cuthbert, Deputy Atty. Gen., Indianapolis, for appellee.
Page 640
HUNTER, Justice.
The defendant, James M. Reynolds, was convicted by a jury of burglary, a class B felony, Ind.Code § 35-43-2-1 (Burns 1979 Repl.) and sentenced to fourteen years' imprisonment. He now presents two issues for review:
1. Whether the trial court erred in permitting a witness to testify as to a confession made by defendant when such confession was not disclosed pursuant to a discovery order; and
2. Whether there is sufficient evidence to support the jury verdict.
The evidence most favorable to the state reveals that on the morning of September 10, 1979, defendant and Richard Keller drove a blue Oldsmobile to the residence of Mr. and Mrs. Lowell Southern and visited defendant's wife who was babysitting for the Southerns' daughter who lived in a trailer located at the back of their property. The defendant and Keller left but returned shortly thereafter. Upon finding defendant's wife not there, they went to the back door of the Southern residence and asked Mrs. Southern, who was alone at the time, where she had gone. Mrs. Southern did not know but took them back to the trailer and let them in for the avowed purpose of looking for some papers. Defendant and his companion stated that they did not find what they wanted and left again. Mrs. Southern then drove to her sister-in-law's house for lunch and returned about an hour and a half later.
Meanwhile, during Mrs. Southern's absence, John Breedlove, an insurance agent, visited the Southern residence and noticed a blue Oldsmobile parked in the driveway. Defendant and Keller approached him from the back door of the house and informed him that nobody was home. Breedlove then left. When Mr. Southern returned home from work that evening, he discovered that four jars of coins were missing from his bedroom. He remembered seeing them last that same [274 Ind. 223] morning before he went to work. Defendant and Keller were later arrested and charged with the burglary.
I.
Defendant asserts that the trial court erred in allowing Lowell Southern to testify that defendant confessed to him that he entered the home and stole the jars of coins. He...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Williams v. State, No. 1281S365
...of Starr's testimony was before the jury and we will not substitute our judgment for the jury's. Reynolds v. State, (1980) Ind., 409 N.E.2d 639; Haskett v. State, (1979) 271 Ind. 648, 395 N.E.2d 229. Patricia Kramer testified that Robert Hunt grabbed her and placed a gun within four inches ......
-
Brown v. State, No. 580S142
...In order for error to be preserved for review, a timely and adequate objection must be raised at trial. Reynolds v. State, (1980) Ind., 409 N.E.2d 639; Gee v. State, (1979) Ind., 389 N.E.2d Defendant moved for a mistrial at one point during the proceedings after alleging that the jurors had......
-
Collins v. State, No. 282S50
...Owens v. State, (1981) Ind., 427 N.E.2d 880, 885; Morris v. State, (1980) Ind., 406 N.E.2d 1187, 1192; Reynolds v. State, (1980) Ind., 409 N.E.2d 639, 640; Gee v. State, (1979) 271 Ind. 28, 389 N.E.2d 303, 313; Harrison v. State, (1972) 258 Ind. 359, 362-63, 281 N.E.2d 98, Assuming the same......
-
Nelson v. State, No. 677S472
...been appropriate under the evidence, waived any error in the court's failure to give such instruction. The claim of fundamental error [274 Ind. 221] transcending our rules of appellate procedure was expressly rejected. Similarly, the claim was rejected where the court did not give, sua spon......
-
Williams v. State, No. 1281S365
...of Starr's testimony was before the jury and we will not substitute our judgment for the jury's. Reynolds v. State, (1980) Ind., 409 N.E.2d 639; Haskett v. State, (1979) 271 Ind. 648, 395 N.E.2d 229. Patricia Kramer testified that Robert Hunt grabbed her and placed a gun within four inches ......
-
Brown v. State, No. 580S142
...In order for error to be preserved for review, a timely and adequate objection must be raised at trial. Reynolds v. State, (1980) Ind., 409 N.E.2d 639; Gee v. State, (1979) Ind., 389 N.E.2d Defendant moved for a mistrial at one point during the proceedings after alleging that the jurors had......
-
Collins v. State, No. 282S50
...Owens v. State, (1981) Ind., 427 N.E.2d 880, 885; Morris v. State, (1980) Ind., 406 N.E.2d 1187, 1192; Reynolds v. State, (1980) Ind., 409 N.E.2d 639, 640; Gee v. State, (1979) 271 Ind. 28, 389 N.E.2d 303, 313; Harrison v. State, (1972) 258 Ind. 359, 362-63, 281 N.E.2d 98, Assuming the same......
-
Nelson v. State, No. 677S472
...been appropriate under the evidence, waived any error in the court's failure to give such instruction. The claim of fundamental error [274 Ind. 221] transcending our rules of appellate procedure was expressly rejected. Similarly, the claim was rejected where the court did not give, sua spon......