FILED MEMORANDUM DECISION Apr 13 2016, 6:55 am
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), CLERK Indiana Supreme Court this Memorandum Decision shall not be Court of Appeals and Tax Court 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 Frederick Vaiana Gregory F. Zoeller Voyles Zahn & Paul Attorney General of Indiana Indianapolis, Indiana Tyler G. Banks Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Christopher Bell, April 13, 2016 Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No. 49A02-1506-CR-683 v. Appeal from the Marion Superior Court State of Indiana, The Honorable Lisa F. Borges, Appellee-Plaintiff Judge Trial Court Cause No. 49G04-1312-MR-76743
Crone, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1506-CR-683 | April 13, 2016 Page 1 of 7 Case Summary
[1] Christopher Bell and Adrian Anthony robbed Robbie Gibson (“Robbie”) and
Ron Gibson (“Ron”). During the robbery, Anthony shot and killed Robbie.
The State charged Bell with one count of felony murder and one count of class
A felony robbery. A jury found him guilty as charged. The trial court vacated
the robbery conviction and sentenced him for felony murder. On appeal, Bell
argues that there is insufficient evidence to prove that he committed felony
murder. We disagree and affirm.
Facts and Procedural History [2] The facts most favorable to the conviction follow. Shortly after noon on
November 27, 2013, Robbie and Ron were remodeling the front porch of a
duplex. Two men, later identified as Bell and Anthony, walked up to where
Robbie and Ron were working. Anthony was wearing a black button-down
shirt and Bell a black hoodie. Anthony asked the two brothers for a cigarette,
and Ron responded that they did not have any. Next, Anthony asked them for
marijuana, and Ron again responded that they did not have any. Bell and
Anthony then walked away from where Ron was standing and toward Robbie.
When Anthony got to the top step on the porch, he pulled out a pistol and told
the Gibsons “it was a robbery.” Tr. at 23. Anthony put the pistol in Robbie’s
side, grabbed his wallet, and handed the wallet to Bell. Bell moved closer to
Robbie to prevent him from leaving the porch, while Anthony put the pistol
against Ron’s neck and demanded Ron’s cell phone.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1506-CR-683 | April 13, 2016 Page 2 of 7 [3] A truck approached the duplex, and Anthony asked Ron, “Is that your boss?”
Id. at 31. Ron lied, said that it was, and started yelling and waving at the truck.
As the truck slowed down and approached the duplex, Bell “took off” running,
and Ron did the same. Id. Ron heard a gunshot, followed by, “Ronnie, he shot
me.” Id. at 31-32. Ron ran back to his brother, as Anthony ran off the porch.
Gale Boggs, Robbie’s mother, came out of her house across the street and saw
the two men wearing black running away. She ran to the porch and held
Robbie until the ambulance arrived. Robbie was later pronounced dead.
Robbie’s wallet was later found in the street; Gale took the wallet into her
house.
[4] Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department Officers Mark Decker, Augustin
Nowak, and Ross Allison were among the first officers who responded to the
scene. Officer Allison received description information regarding the suspects
from Officer Decker and asked for other responding officers to set up a two- to
three-block perimeter around the crime scene. Officer Michael Roach heard the
dispatch and saw two men matching the description of the suspects running
toward him. Anthony tried to enter a nearby church, and Bell took off his
hoodie and threw it on the ground. Officer Roach drew his gun and ordered
them to the ground. Both initially complied, but Anthony ran away. Bell was
detained until other officers arrived with Ron for a show-up identification.
Officer Decker drove Ron to three locations to perform show-up identifications
on Bell and two other suspects. When Ron was asked whether Bell was one of
the perpetrators, he replied that Bell “looked like him but he had a different …
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1506-CR-683 | April 13, 2016 Page 3 of 7 he had a hoodie on.” Id. at 36. Bell was released after Ron failed to identify
him as one of the perpetrators. On November 28, Bell purchased a Greyhound
bus ticket in Indianapolis and traveled to Terre Haute.
[5] Sergeant Mark Hess of the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department
fugitive task force was asked to track Ron’s missing cell phone. After obtaining
a warrant, Sergeant Hess received location information about the phone, which
included a timing analysis called “precision location.” Id. at 245. “Precision
location” is an automated system that determines the precise location of a cell
phone, rather than merely locating the nearest cell tower. Id. On November
28, Sergeant Hess tracked Ron’s stolen cellphone from an Indianapolis bus
station to a Terre Haute apartment that matched Bell’s address. When the
police arrived, Bell ran to a room in the back of the apartment, where the cell
phone was ultimately found. Bell’s DNA was later found on the cell phone.
[6] Bell was arrested and transported to Indianapolis. The State charged Bell with
one count of felony murder and one count of class A felony robbery and also
charged Anthony with murder, felony murder, robbery, and carrying a handgun
without a license. At trial, Ron identified both Bell and Anthony as the
perpetrators of the robbery and killing of Robbie. The jury was instructed on
the theory of accomplice liability and found Bell and Anthony guilty as
charged. The trial court vacated Bell’s robbery conviction and sentenced Bell to
forty-five years in the Department of Correction. This appeal ensued.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1506-CR-683 | April 13, 2016 Page 4 of 7 Discussion and Decision [7] Bell argues that there is insufficient evidence to support his conviction for
felony murder. When reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence
underlying a criminal conviction, we neither reweigh the evidence nor assess
the credibility of witnesses. Bailey v. State, 979 N.E.2d 133,135 (Ind. 2012). We
consider only the evidence favorable to the verdict and all reasonable inferences
therefrom. McHenry v. State, 820 N.E.2d 124, 126 (Ind. 2005). “[W]e 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.” Bailey, 979 N.E.2d at 134. 1
[8] Someone who kills another person while committing or attempting to commit
robbery commits murder, a felony. Ind. Code § 35-42-1-1. A person who
knowingly or intentionally aids, induces, or causes another person to commit
an offense commits that offense, even if the other person has not been
prosecuted for the offense, has not been convicted of the offense, or has been
acquitted of the offense.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
FILED MEMORANDUM DECISION Apr 13 2016, 6:55 am
Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), CLERK Indiana Supreme Court this Memorandum Decision shall not be Court of Appeals and Tax Court 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 Frederick Vaiana Gregory F. Zoeller Voyles Zahn & Paul Attorney General of Indiana Indianapolis, Indiana Tyler G. Banks Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Christopher Bell, April 13, 2016 Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No. 49A02-1506-CR-683 v. Appeal from the Marion Superior Court State of Indiana, The Honorable Lisa F. Borges, Appellee-Plaintiff Judge Trial Court Cause No. 49G04-1312-MR-76743
Crone, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1506-CR-683 | April 13, 2016 Page 1 of 7 Case Summary
[1] Christopher Bell and Adrian Anthony robbed Robbie Gibson (“Robbie”) and
Ron Gibson (“Ron”). During the robbery, Anthony shot and killed Robbie.
The State charged Bell with one count of felony murder and one count of class
A felony robbery. A jury found him guilty as charged. The trial court vacated
the robbery conviction and sentenced him for felony murder. On appeal, Bell
argues that there is insufficient evidence to prove that he committed felony
murder. We disagree and affirm.
Facts and Procedural History [2] The facts most favorable to the conviction follow. Shortly after noon on
November 27, 2013, Robbie and Ron were remodeling the front porch of a
duplex. Two men, later identified as Bell and Anthony, walked up to where
Robbie and Ron were working. Anthony was wearing a black button-down
shirt and Bell a black hoodie. Anthony asked the two brothers for a cigarette,
and Ron responded that they did not have any. Next, Anthony asked them for
marijuana, and Ron again responded that they did not have any. Bell and
Anthony then walked away from where Ron was standing and toward Robbie.
When Anthony got to the top step on the porch, he pulled out a pistol and told
the Gibsons “it was a robbery.” Tr. at 23. Anthony put the pistol in Robbie’s
side, grabbed his wallet, and handed the wallet to Bell. Bell moved closer to
Robbie to prevent him from leaving the porch, while Anthony put the pistol
against Ron’s neck and demanded Ron’s cell phone.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1506-CR-683 | April 13, 2016 Page 2 of 7 [3] A truck approached the duplex, and Anthony asked Ron, “Is that your boss?”
Id. at 31. Ron lied, said that it was, and started yelling and waving at the truck.
As the truck slowed down and approached the duplex, Bell “took off” running,
and Ron did the same. Id. Ron heard a gunshot, followed by, “Ronnie, he shot
me.” Id. at 31-32. Ron ran back to his brother, as Anthony ran off the porch.
Gale Boggs, Robbie’s mother, came out of her house across the street and saw
the two men wearing black running away. She ran to the porch and held
Robbie until the ambulance arrived. Robbie was later pronounced dead.
Robbie’s wallet was later found in the street; Gale took the wallet into her
house.
[4] Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department Officers Mark Decker, Augustin
Nowak, and Ross Allison were among the first officers who responded to the
scene. Officer Allison received description information regarding the suspects
from Officer Decker and asked for other responding officers to set up a two- to
three-block perimeter around the crime scene. Officer Michael Roach heard the
dispatch and saw two men matching the description of the suspects running
toward him. Anthony tried to enter a nearby church, and Bell took off his
hoodie and threw it on the ground. Officer Roach drew his gun and ordered
them to the ground. Both initially complied, but Anthony ran away. Bell was
detained until other officers arrived with Ron for a show-up identification.
Officer Decker drove Ron to three locations to perform show-up identifications
on Bell and two other suspects. When Ron was asked whether Bell was one of
the perpetrators, he replied that Bell “looked like him but he had a different …
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1506-CR-683 | April 13, 2016 Page 3 of 7 he had a hoodie on.” Id. at 36. Bell was released after Ron failed to identify
him as one of the perpetrators. On November 28, Bell purchased a Greyhound
bus ticket in Indianapolis and traveled to Terre Haute.
[5] Sergeant Mark Hess of the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department
fugitive task force was asked to track Ron’s missing cell phone. After obtaining
a warrant, Sergeant Hess received location information about the phone, which
included a timing analysis called “precision location.” Id. at 245. “Precision
location” is an automated system that determines the precise location of a cell
phone, rather than merely locating the nearest cell tower. Id. On November
28, Sergeant Hess tracked Ron’s stolen cellphone from an Indianapolis bus
station to a Terre Haute apartment that matched Bell’s address. When the
police arrived, Bell ran to a room in the back of the apartment, where the cell
phone was ultimately found. Bell’s DNA was later found on the cell phone.
[6] Bell was arrested and transported to Indianapolis. The State charged Bell with
one count of felony murder and one count of class A felony robbery and also
charged Anthony with murder, felony murder, robbery, and carrying a handgun
without a license. At trial, Ron identified both Bell and Anthony as the
perpetrators of the robbery and killing of Robbie. The jury was instructed on
the theory of accomplice liability and found Bell and Anthony guilty as
charged. The trial court vacated Bell’s robbery conviction and sentenced Bell to
forty-five years in the Department of Correction. This appeal ensued.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1506-CR-683 | April 13, 2016 Page 4 of 7 Discussion and Decision [7] Bell argues that there is insufficient evidence to support his conviction for
felony murder. When reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence
underlying a criminal conviction, we neither reweigh the evidence nor assess
the credibility of witnesses. Bailey v. State, 979 N.E.2d 133,135 (Ind. 2012). We
consider only the evidence favorable to the verdict and all reasonable inferences
therefrom. McHenry v. State, 820 N.E.2d 124, 126 (Ind. 2005). “[W]e 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.” Bailey, 979 N.E.2d at 134. 1
[8] Someone who kills another person while committing or attempting to commit
robbery commits murder, a felony. Ind. Code § 35-42-1-1. A person who
knowingly or intentionally aids, induces, or causes another person to commit
an offense commits that offense, even if the other person has not been
prosecuted for the offense, has not been convicted of the offense, or has been
acquitted of the offense. Ind. Code § 35-41-2-4. “An individual who aids,
induces, or causes the commission of a crime is equally as culpable as the
person who actually commits the offense.” Brooks v. State, 895 N.E.2d 130, 133
1 Bell asks us to “probe and sift the record to truly determine whether the evidence supports his conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.” Appellant’s Br. at 14 (quoting Smith v. State, 270 Ind. 479, 480, 386 N.E.2d 1193, 1194 (1979)). The “probe and sift” language does not require any deviation from the sufficiency standard. Jennings v. State, 553 N.E.2d 191, 192 (Ind. Ct. App. 1990). The request to probe and sift the record is merely a suggestion to reweigh the evidence and judge witness credibility, which we must decline. Also, Bell’s reliance on Layman v. State, 42 N.E.3d 972 (Ind. 2015), is misplaced because that case involved the death of a co-perpetrator.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1506-CR-683 | April 13, 2016 Page 5 of 7 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008). When determining whether a person aided in the
commission of a crime, a trier of fact considers factors such as the person’s
presence at the scene of the crime, companionship with another engaged in
criminal activity, failure to oppose the crime, and the person’s conduct before,
during, and after the occurrence of the crime. Garland v. State, 719 N.E.2d
1236, 1238 (Ind. 1999). It was not required that Bell be charged as an
accomplice; accomplice liability is not established as a separate crime, but
merely as a separate basis of liability for the crime charged. Suggs v. State, 883
N.E.2d at 1188, 1192 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008). “[A] defendant may be convicted
on evidence of aiding or inducing even though the State charged the defendant
as the principal.” Id.
[9] First, Bell contends that there is not a sufficient nexus which connects him to
the crime. Bell ignores the fact that the jury was instructed on accomplice
liability, and his argument is largely premised on the assumption that he was
convicted as a principal. Bell was present at the scene of the crime and had
companionship with the individual who engaged in criminal activity. Bell and
Anthony approached the duplex where Ron and Robbie were working. Bell
stood beside Anthony when Anthony brandished a pistol and declared that “it
was a robbery.” Tr. at 23. Bell failed to oppose the crime and moved closer to
Robbie to block him from leaving. Anthony took Robbie’s wallet and Ron’s
cell phone and handed them to Bell. Ron’s stolen cell phone was tracked to the
Greyhound bus station, where Bell purchased his bus ticket. Officers continued
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1506-CR-683 | April 13, 2016 Page 6 of 7 to track the stolen cell phone and ultimately found it in Bell’s apartment in
Terre Haute.
[10] Bell also asserts that Ron Gibson gave inconsistent statements and, more
specifically, that he failed to positively identify Bell as a suspect, which in turn
leaves the stolen cell phone as the only evidence connecting Bell to the crime.
Regarding Ron’s pretrial statement, he told the detective that Bell “looked like
[one of the perpetrators] but he had a different … he had a hoodie on.” Id. at
36. Ron’s response at most suggests that he was unsure whether Bell, who had
discarded his hoodie, was one of the perpetrators; his response was not an
unequivocal denial of the possibility. Further, any inconsistencies in his
statements are questions for the jury. Emerson v. State, 724 N.E.2d 605, 609
(Ind. 2000). The foregoing evidence is more than sufficient to establish that Bell
aided in the robbery that led to Robbie’s murder. Accordingly, we affirm Bell’s
conviction.
[11] Affirmed.
Vaidik, C.J., and Bailey, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1506-CR-683 | April 13, 2016 Page 7 of 7