Terry v. State

Decision Date04 January 1984
Docket NumberNo. 583S194,583S194
Citation457 N.E.2d 546
PartiesDoveon TERRY, Appellant, v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee.
CourtIndiana Supreme Court

Richard J. Conroy, Merrillville, for appellant.

Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Kathleen Ransom Radford, Deputy Atty. Gen., Indianapolis, for appellee.

PIVARNIK, Justice.

Defendant-Appellant Doveon Terry was convicted by a jury in the Lake Superior Court of felony murder, Ind.Code Sec. 35-42-1-1(2) (Burns 1979). He subsequently was sentenced to fifty years imprisonment. Appellant now directly appeals and raises the following three issues for our review:

1. whether there was sufficient evidence of probative value to support Appellant's conviction;

2. whether the trial court erred by allowing Appellant's co-defendant to introduce evidence that Appellant had recently been confined in the Indiana Boy's School; and

3. whether the trial court erred by denying Appellant's motion for severance from the case of his co-defendant.

The facts adduced during trial show that Lee Richardson, manager of the Galaxy Lounge in Gary, observed Appellant and Milton Anderson standing in the lobby of the Galaxy at approximately 8 p.m. on February 22, 1982. Richardson, already familiar with Appellant, told Appellant and Anderson to vacate the lobby which they did. Shortly thereafter, Richardson heard a scream and, looking out a front window, saw Anderson pulling at a lady and her handbag. The lady later was identified as seventy-year-old Lucille Gray. The area in front of the Galaxy was well-lighted and Richardson observed that Anderson held a knife as he attempted to grab Mrs. Gray's handbag. He also observed that Mrs. Gray was struggling and had blood on her nose. Richardson called the police. Pamyre Exantus and Sandy Emerson were standing at the street corner by the Galaxy waiting for the traffic light to change when they noticed Mrs. Gray attempting to ward off her attackers. Exantus and Emerson observed that Anderson was slashing at Mrs. Gray with a knife. When Exantus reached the alley that the men pushed Mrs. Gray into, the men were gone. Mrs. Gray had blood on her hands and nose, and cried: "two got me, they got my purse." Although the police and an ambulance quickly arrived, Mrs. Gray soon died from internal bleeding due to the stab wounds to her heart and lungs. Police officers proceeded to Appellant's residence located approximately one block from the Galaxy where they found both suspects together. When Anderson was searched, a knife covered with human blood stains was found in his pocket. Both Appellant and Anderson had scratches on their faces.

I

Appellant was acquitted of murder but was convicted of felony murder in the instant case. Appellant now argues that there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction. With regard to sufficiency of the evidence questions, it is well-settled that this Court will neither reweigh the evidence nor determine the credibility of witnesses. If there is substantial evidence to support the jury's conclusion that Appellant was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, the jury's verdict will not be disturbed. Oatts v. State, (1982) Ind., 437 N.E.2d 463, reh. denied; Gatewood v. State, (1982) Ind., 430 N.E.2d 781. Although the jury apparently found that Appellant's co-defendant, Milton Anderson, actually inflicted the fatal knife wounds upon Mrs. Gray, the evidence clearly supports the jury in finding that Appellant actively participated in the robbery and murderous attack upon Mrs. Gray. Specifically, the evidence shows that both Appellant and Anderson were observed together inside the Galaxy Lounge immediately before the attack which took place just outside the Lounge, both were seen together attacking Mrs. Gray and both were apprehended together in Appellant's residence shortly after the attack. Our law is clear that a person who aids another person to commit an offense commits that offense. See Ind.Code Sec. 35-41-2-4 (Burns 1979); Rogers v. State, (1974) 262 Ind. 315, 315 N.E.2d 707. Reviewing the evidence in the instant case, we find more than sufficient evidence of probative value to justify the jury's verdict.

II

At the close of the State's case-in-chief, co-defendant Milton Anderson, by counsel, informed the trial court that he intended to introduce evidence of several statements made by Appellant to the police immediately after Appellant's arrest. Anderson specifically planned to testify that shortly after Appellant was arrested, Appellant made three separate statements to Sergeant David Wade to the effect: "I wouldn't do nothing like that. I just got out of Boy's School." Appellant objected to the proposed admission of Anderson's testimony and moved for a severance claiming that the proposed testimony would unduly prejudice his case. The trial court denied Appellant's motion and admitted the evidence over Appellant's continuing objection. Anderson therefore was permitted to testify that on three occasions immediately following Appellant's arrest, he heard Appellant tell Officer Wade that Appellant could not have committed any crimes since Appellant recently had been released from the Boy's School. Sergeant Wade also was allowed to testify that Appellant voluntarily and without solicitation stated that "he had just gotten out of Boy's School."

The State now contends that the trial court did not commit reversible error by admitting evidence of the statements Appellant made immediately following his arrest inasmuch as said statements were part of the instant crime's res gestae. We agree. As Appellant argues, evidence of a defendant's conduct unrelated to the charged offense is generally inadmissible to prove guilt. When there are acts near in time and place to the charged crime which complete the story of that crime, however, evidence of those acts are admissible under the res gestae doctrine. Pitman v. State, (1982) Ind., 436 N.E.2d 74; Brown v. State, (1981) Ind., 417 N.E.2d 333.

In the instant case, the police returned Anderson and Appellant to the Galaxy Lounge approximately ten minutes after the police left the Galaxy to apprehend them. Appellant and Anderson there were positively identified and arrested. It was while being arrested...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Lahrman v. State
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • 17 Julio 1984
    ...favorably to the State, and will affirm if there is substantial evidence of probative value supporting the verdict. See, Terry v. State, (1984) Ind., 457 N.E.2d 546, 548; Gatewood v. State, (1982) Ind., 430 N.E.2d 781, 782-83; Griffin v. State, (1980) Ind.App., 413 N.E.2d Lahrman relies on ......
  • Hudson v. State
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • 26 Abril 1984
    ...to support the jury's conclusion Hudson was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, its verdict will not be disturbed. See Terry v. State, (1984) Ind., 457 N.E.2d 546. Pursuant to this oft-cited standard, we must affirm The informant and the police officers involved testified the informant was su......
  • Davis v. State
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court
    • 13 Junio 1988
    ...who aids another in the commission of an offense commits that offense as the act of one is attributable to the other. Terry v. State (1984), Ind., 457 N.E.2d 546, 548. Davis claims that when the evidence is viewed most favorably to the State it indicates the defendant may have been with the......
  • Harris v. State
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • 25 Agosto 2014
    ...statements. See Stovall v. State, 477 N.E.2d 252, 254–55 (Ind.1985) (pertaining to the rape-shield statute); Terry v. State, 457 N.E.2d 546, 548–49 (Ind.1984) (pertaining to a co-defendant's out-of-court statements, but finding no prejudice in the denial of a mid-trial motion to sever). Unl......

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