James McKinney v. State of Indiana
This text of James McKinney v. State of Indiana (James McKinney v. State of Indiana) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Aaron E. Haith Jeffrey A. Modisett
Indianapolis, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana
Andrew L. Hedges
Deputy Attorney General
Indianapolis, Indiana
In The
INDIANA SUPREME COURT
JAMES McKINNEY, )
Defendant-Appellant, )
)
v. ) 49S00-9702-CR-122
) STATE OF INDIANA, )
Plaintiff-Appellee. )
________________________________________________
APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT
The Honorable Nancy L. Broyles, Master Commissioner
Cause No. 49G04-9507-CF-102627
_________________________________________________
On Direct Appeal
DICKSON, J.
The defendant contends that his murder conviction is not supported by sufficient evidence. When presented with this issue, we will affirm the conviction if, considering only the probative evidence and reasonable inferences supporting the verdict and without reweighing evidence or assessing witness credibility, we conclude that a reasonable trier of fact could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Mayo v. State , 681 N.E.2d 689, 691 (Ind. 1997).
The evidence included the testimony of two witnesses who observed the defendant shoot the victim. Two witnesses heard the defendant admit the shooting. The defendant walked up to the victim, checked him for weapons, and then repeatedly shot him when he noticed that the victim was in possession of a handgun. The evidence does not demonstrate that the victim ever attempted to use the handgun to place the defendant in fear of great bodily harm or death. The defendant argues that inconsistencies render the testimony inherently dubious and that the State failed to rebut his claim of self-defense.
Applying our standard of review, we find that a reasonable jury could have found the defendant guilty of murder beyond a reasonable doubt.
Judgment affirmed.
SHEPARD, C.J., and SULLIVAN, SELBY, and BOEHM, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
James McKinney v. State of Indiana, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-mckinney-v-state-of-indiana-ind-1998.