Williams v. State, No. 381

Docket NºNo. 381
Citation431 N.E.2d 793
Case DateMarch 03, 1982
CourtSupreme Court of Indiana

Page 793

431 N.E.2d 793
Robert Earl WILLIAMS, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Indiana, Appellee.
No. 381 S 77.
Supreme Court of Indiana.
March 3, 1982.

Page 794

Rebecca Balanoff, Hammond, for appellant.

Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen., Carolyn M. Brawner, Deputy Atty. Gen., Indianapolis, for appellee.

GIVAN, Chief Justice.

Appellant was convicted by a jury of Robbery and declared to be an habitual criminal. He was sentenced for ten (10) years on the robbery charge and after a bifurcated hearing was declared an habitual criminal and his sentence was increased to thirty (30) years.

The record shows the following facts. At approximately 12:45 A.M. on February 11, 1981, the White Hen Pantry in Hammond, Indiana was robbed. The robber was described as a man wearing a mask, a maroon and white shirt, a floppy hat, and a light colored coat. He produced a gun and demanded the money in the cash drawer. Paula Miller, one of the employees of the restaurant, gave the man paper money consisting of one and five dollar bills, and some food stamps. The money was placed in a brown paper bag. He left the scene of the robbery in a blue automobile bearing Illinois license plates reading EDY 10. Although a mask covered most of his face, the victims of the robbery were able to identify him as male by the tone of his voice, and as a black person by observing his skin and hair not covered by the mask. Witnesses described him as being about 5'8 and of medium build.

Page 795

Investigating police officers furnished with the above description, including the license number of the automobile, drove to a nearby housing project to search for the suspect. There they found a parked vehicle corresponding to the description given including the license number. Appellant was seated in the car at the time of its discovery. The arresting officer ordered appellant out of the automobile at which time appellant jumped from the car and dove between the car and a nearby parked car. The arresting officer was able to persuade him to come out from between the cars at which time he was placed under arrest.

A search was then made of the area and a paper bag of money of the same denomination taken in the robbery was found. At the police station, a search of Mr. Williams produced seven one-dollar food stamps. At the time of his arrest the appellant was wearing a dark hat, a light coat, and a maroon and white shirt.

At the trial, appellant presented an alibi defense. Appellant claims the evidence is insufficient for the jury to find that he was the perpetrator of the robbery. Appellant makes this claim based upon the fact that the victims of the robbery could not identify him personally and were not sure that the clothing appellant was wearing at the time of his arrest was the same clothing worn by the robber, although it was similar in appearance. He further points to the fact that no fingerprints were recovered from the car in which he was sitting at the time he was apprehended. He also contends the money recovered in the paper sack at the scene of his apprehension was not positively proven to be the money taken in the robbery. He further claims that it was not until he was in the police station that food stamps were found on his person. It is his claim that these stamps were planted on him by the police...

To continue reading

Request your trial
21 practice notes
  • Kindred v. State, No. 685S224
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • 28 Junio 1989
    ...The habitual offender hearing is not the proper forum to contest the validity of these prior convictions. Williams v. State (1982), Ind., 431 N.E.2d 793. The proper procedure to challenge this type of predicate conviction is for the accused to set aside the predicate conviction in a direct ......
  • Short v. State, No. 381S86
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • 27 Diciembre 1982
    ...itself. See, Yager v. State, (1982) Ind., 437 N.E.2d 454; Johnson v. State, (1982) Ind., 432 N.E.2d 1358; Williams v. State, (1982) Ind., 431 N.E.2d 793; Hall, supra. If the habitual offender statute is read to define a separate offense, its application would constitute a violation of the d......
  • State v. Hennings, No. 49323-5
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Washington
    • 6 Octubre 1983
    ...was obtained in violation of Boykin. Similar holdings are found in State v. Holden, 375 So.2d 1372 (La.1979); Williams v. State, Ind., 431 N.E.2d 793 (1982); State v. Adamson, 197 Kan. 486, 419 P.2d 860 (1966). In the subject case the State met its burden of proof when it proved beyond a re......
  • Prentice v. State, No. 1183S410
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • 18 Febrero 1985
    ...is whether defendant has been found guilty and sentenced for the prior unrelated offenses charged, Williams v. State, (1982) Ind., 431 N.E.2d 793, identity is a material fact and thus the fingerprint card was Defendant argues that imposition of a thirty-three year sentence is cruel and unus......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
21 cases
  • Kindred v. State, No. 685S224
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • 28 Junio 1989
    ...The habitual offender hearing is not the proper forum to contest the validity of these prior convictions. Williams v. State (1982), Ind., 431 N.E.2d 793. The proper procedure to challenge this type of predicate conviction is for the accused to set aside the predicate conviction in a direct ......
  • Short v. State, No. 381S86
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • 27 Diciembre 1982
    ...itself. See, Yager v. State, (1982) Ind., 437 N.E.2d 454; Johnson v. State, (1982) Ind., 432 N.E.2d 1358; Williams v. State, (1982) Ind., 431 N.E.2d 793; Hall, supra. If the habitual offender statute is read to define a separate offense, its application would constitute a violation of the d......
  • State v. Hennings, No. 49323-5
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Washington
    • 6 Octubre 1983
    ...was obtained in violation of Boykin. Similar holdings are found in State v. Holden, 375 So.2d 1372 (La.1979); Williams v. State, Ind., 431 N.E.2d 793 (1982); State v. Adamson, 197 Kan. 486, 419 P.2d 860 (1966). In the subject case the State met its burden of proof when it proved beyond a re......
  • Prentice v. State, No. 1183S410
    • United States
    • Indiana Supreme Court of Indiana
    • 18 Febrero 1985
    ...is whether defendant has been found guilty and sentenced for the prior unrelated offenses charged, Williams v. State, (1982) Ind., 431 N.E.2d 793, identity is a material fact and thus the fingerprint card was Defendant argues that imposition of a thirty-three year sentence is cruel and unus......
  • 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