Smith v. State, No. 1169S267

• Docket Nº: No. 1169S267
• Citation: 266 N.E.2d 216, 255 Ind. 687
• Case Date: February 10, 1971
• Court: Supreme Court of Indiana

Page 216

266 N.E.2d 216 255 Ind. 687 Richard Leslie SMITH, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Indiana, Appellee. No. 1169S267. Supreme Court of Indiana. Feb. 10, 1971.

[255 Ind. 688]

Page 217

Michael T. Dugan II, Indianapolis, for appellant.

Theodore L. Sendak, Atty. Gen., Mark Peden, Walter E. Bravard, Jr., Deputy Attys. Gen., for appellee.

PRENTICE, Judge.

Defendant was convicted of rape under Acts of 1941, ch. 148, § 3, (1956 Repl.) Burns' 10--4201, in that he did '* * * unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge of * * *,' the complaining witness, '* * * a woman, forcibly and against her will. * * *.' The appeal is predicated upon the sufficiency of the evidence, and the further charge by the defendant that he was inebriated to the extent of being incapable of either the act of sexual intercourse or of the specific intent for the rape.

The evidence disclosed that the complaining witness voluntarily entered the vehicle operated by one Rubin, in which defendant was a passenger and that she voluntarily rode and drank some beer with them. It further disclosed that, on one occasion, defendant and Rubin offered to let her out and she refused because of the heavy traffic at that point along the road and that ultimately, the parties drove to a secluded spot where the defendant stood behind the automobile, urinated, and drank beer for from twenty to thirty minutes while Rubin had sexual relations with the complaining witness inside the vehicle.

Page 218

There is conflicting testimony on the points of whether or not defendant also had sexual relations with the complaining witness and whether or not the act of intercourse between Rubin and her was against her will.

Without here restating each point raised by defendant, we shall proceed to answer the same.

When the sufficiency of the evidence is raised as an issue on appeal, this Court has often stated that it will look only [255 Ind. 689] to that evidence and the reasonable inferences therefrom which support the findings of the trial court. Asher v. State (1969), Ind., 244 N.E.2d 89.

The conviction will be affirmed if, from that viewpoint, there is evidence of probative value from which the trier of facts could reasonably infer that the appellant was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Smith v. State (1970), Ind., 260 N.E.2d 558.

The complaining witness unequivocally identified the defendant as one of the two men who by violence and threats of violence had sexual intercourse with her against her...