Bernard Johnson, Jr. v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

• Court: Indiana Court of Appeals
• Decided: October 7, 2015
• Docket: 71A04-1502-CR-60
• Status: Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), Oct 07 2015, 8:56 am this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral estoppel, or the law of the case.

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Donald J. Berger Gregory F. Zoeller South Bend, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana

Karl Scharnberg Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Bernard Johnson, Jr., October 7, 2015 Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Cause No. 71A04-1502-CR-60 v. Appeal from the St. Joseph Superior Court State of Indiana, The Honorable Elizabeth C. Appellee-Plaintiff. Hurley, Judge Trial Court Cause No. 71D08-1310-FC-226

Barnes, Judge.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 71A04-1502-CR-60 | October 7, 2015 Page 1 of 4 Case Summary [1] Bernard Johnson appeals his conviction for Class C felony possession of

cocaine. We affirm.

Issue [2] Johnson raises one issue, which we restate as whether there was sufficient

evidence to support his conviction.

Facts [3] On October 2, 2013, South Bend police officers were pursuing a suspect when

they encountered Johnson having an argument with a woman. The argument

escalated, and police intervened. Johnson did not cooperate with the police,

and they had to forcibly restrain him and eventually handcuff him. During this

encounter, a crowd gathered, and Johnson claimed to have been shot. Two

officers separately conducted pat down searches for weapons before putting

Johnson, who had not been shot, in a police car and transporting him to the

jail. When he arrived at the jail, a more thorough search was conducted, and a

baggie containing 3.30 grams of cocaine was found in the pocket of basketball

shorts Johnson was wearing under his pants.

[4] The State charged Johnson with Class C felony possession of cocaine and Class

A misdemeanor domestic battery. The battery charge was later amended to

Class B misdemeanor battery. A jury found Johnson guilty of the possession of

cocaine charge and not guilty of the battery charge. Johnson now appeals.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 71A04-1502-CR-60 | October 7, 2015 Page 2 of 4 Analysis [5] Johnson argues there is insufficient evidence to support his robbery conviction.

When reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we neither

reweigh the evidence nor assess the credibility of witnesses. Bailey v. State, 979

N.E.2d 133, 135 (Ind. 2012). We view the evidence—even if conflicting—and

all reasonable inferences drawn from it in a light most favorable to the

conviction and affirm if there is substantial evidence of probative value

supporting each element of the crime from which a reasonable trier of fact

could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Id.

[6] Johnson argues that, because the cocaine was not discovered during the pat

down searches conducted before he was transported to the jail and he

immediately denied the cocaine was his, the State did not prove that he

knowingly possessed it. “A person engages in conduct ‘knowingly’ if, when he

engages in the conduct, he is aware of the high probability that he is doing so.’”

Ind. Code § 35-41-2-2(b).

[7] The officers who conducted the pat down searches testified that they patted

down Johnson’s outer clothing to look for weapons before transporting him to

jail. One officer explained that, because of Johnson’s behavior and the crowd,

he was not as thorough in the pat down search as he usually is. The other

officer testified that he did not go through every pocket and that he was looking

for large, hard weapons. The jail officer testified about conducting a more

detailed search upon Johnson’s arrival at the jail. She also stated that the

cocaine was found in a pocket of shorts Johnson was wearing under his pants. Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 71A04-1502-CR-60 | October 7, 2015 Page 3 of 4 [8] It was for the jury to assess the witnesses’ testimony, including Johnson’s claim

that someone else had put the cocaine in his pocket. There is sufficient

evidence to establish that Johnson knowingly possessed the cocaine.

Conclusion [9] There was sufficient evidence to support Johnson’s conviction for Class C

felony possession of cocaine. We affirm.

[10] Affirmed.

Kirsch, J., and Najam, J., concur.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 71A04-1502-CR-60 | October 7, 2015 Page 4 of 4