Williams v. State, 374S51

• Decision Date: 16 September 1974
• Docket Number: No. 374S51,374S51
• Parties: Michael Charles WILLIAMS, Appellant (Defendant below), v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee (Plaintiff below).
• Court: Indiana Supreme Court

Page 354

316 N.E.2d 354

262 Ind. 382

Michael Charles WILLIAMS, Appellant (Defendant below), v. STATE of Indiana, Appellee (Plaintiff below).

No. 374S51.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

Sept. 16, 1974.

Paul J. Giorgi, Merrillville, Gerald N. Svetanoff, Gary, for appellant.

Theodore L. Sendak, Atty. Gen., A. Frank Gleaves, III, Deputy Atty. Gen., Indianapolis, for appellee.

GIVAN, Justice.

This is an appeal from the denial of a belated motion to correct errors. The appellant was convicted of murder in the second degree on the 10th day of March, 1967. In November, 1973, he filed a petition for a belated motion to correct errors, which petition was granted. Following a hearing the trial court denied appellant's motion to correct errors. This appeal is taken from that denial.

The issues presented are: 1) Whether self-defense was shown, so as to preclude a verdict of guilty of second degree murder. 2) Whether at most the evidence would only support a verdict of guilty of manslaughter.

We answer both of these questions in the negative and affirm the trial court.

The record in this case shows the following:

On the afternoon of January 1, 1967, the appellant entered the apartment of Emma Morgan to use the telephone. At that time the deceased, Orville Edwards, was a guest in Mrs. Morgan's home. After using the telephone, the appellant left the Morgan apartment carrying a can of beer. Mrs. Morgan opened the door for the appellant and as he stepped outside, he turned and pointed a pistol at Mrs. Morgan. She told appellant if he shot her, it would be the last person he shot and closed the door. A few minutes later Orville Edwards told Mrs. Morgan he had to go 'see about my fire.' After Edwards left the apartment, she heard him say, 'Hey buddy, I thought you went home' and 'Hey, you down there! You're hiding down there, ain't you?' A few moments later Mrs. Morgan heard a shot. She looked out her window and saw the appellant standing in an entrance way with a pistol. She saw him fire a second shot from the pistol.

Mrs. Morgan left her apartment and found Orville Edwards lying on the floor at the bottom of the stairs.

Appellant's version of the shooting was that as he left Mrs. Morgan's apartment, Edwards followed him and attacked him with a straight razor, and in order to escape Edwards he went into a closet at the entrance of the building, and that when he realized he was trapped inside the closet with Edwards outside, he fired two shots through a crack in the closet door to frighten Edwards away. However, six witnesses, including Mrs. Morgan and investigating police officers, testified that they saw no weapon near Edwards' body following the shooting. The police officers testified that they searched Edwards' body and that he had no weapons.

It is true as argued by the appellant that when self-defense is claimed by the accused, the jury must look to the situation from the defendant's viewpoint. However, this does not mean that the jury is required to believe a defendant's testimony. See Lytle v. State (1968), 251 Ind. 413, 241 N.E.2d 366, 15 Ind.Dec. 721. It is obvious from the record in this case that the jury was required to make a determination as to whether or not the appellant was telling the truth in his version of the shooting. The jury chose to disbelieve the appellant's statements concerning the use of a razor by Edwards, and the claim that appellant fired both shots from the inside of the closet. The jury chose to believe the testimony of Mrs. Morgan, who testified that she saw the appellant fire a shot while standing in the entranceway outside the closet.

This Court has repeatedly stated that it will not weigh...