Jourdan Anthony Davis v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

Opinion

MEMORANDUM DECISION FILED Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), Jan 24 2018, 6:57 am

this Memorandum Decision shall not be CLERK Indiana Supreme Court regarded as precedent or cited before any Court of Appeals and Tax Court 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 Victoria L. Bailey Curtis T. Hill, Jr. Indianapolis, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana

Christina D. Pace Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Jourdan Anthony Davis, January 24, 2018 Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No. 49A04-1706-CR-1293 v. Appeal from the Marion Superior Court State of Indiana, The Honorable Angela Dow Appellee-Plaintiff Davis, Judge Trial Court Cause No. 49G16-1607-F6-27191

Altice, Judge.

Case Summary

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A04-1706-CR-1293 | January 24, 2018 Page 1 of 4 [1] Following a bench trial, Jourdan Davis was convicted of two counts of Level 6

felony possession of a narcotic drug, one count of Level 6 felony possession of

cocaine, and one count of Class B misdemeanor disorderly conduct. On

appeal, Davis argues that the State presented insufficient evidence to support

his disorderly conduct conviction, a point which the State concedes.

[2] We reverse in part and remand with instructions to vacate Davis’s disorderly

conduct conviction.

Facts & Procedural History

[3] On June 15, 2016, Officer Gregory Shue of the Indianapolis Metropolitan

Police Department responded to a call concerning a disturbance at a local

motel. Upon his arrival, Officer Shue encountered Davis and Tiarra Cole in the

parking lot. Davis was very agitated and screaming at Cole, and when he saw

Officer Shue’s police car, he quickly walked away. Davis was detained and

ultimately found to be in possession of heroin, fentanyl, and cocaine. Although

there was testimony that Davis continued to shout at Cole throughout the

encounter, no evidence was presented that he was ever told to be quiet.

[4] As a result of these events, Davis was charged with two counts of Level 6 felony

possession of a narcotic drug, one count of Level 6 felony possession of

cocaine, and one count of Class B misdemeanor disorderly conduct. 1

1 Davis was also charged with Class A misdemeanor domestic battery and Class A misdemeanor battery, but these charges were dismissed during trial.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A04-1706-CR-1293 | January 24, 2018 Page 2 of 4 Following a bench trial, Davis was found guilty as charged. Davis was

sentenced to 365 days on each Level 6 felony conviction and 60 days on the

Class B misdemeanor conviction, with all sentences to be served concurrently.

Davis now appeals.

Discussion & Decision

[5] On appeal, Davis challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his

disorderly conduct conviction only. In reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency

of the evidence, we neither reweigh the evidence nor judge the credibility of

witnesses. Atteberry v. State, 911 N.E.2d 601, 609 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009). Instead,

we consider only the evidence supporting the conviction and the reasonable

inferences flowing therefrom. Id. If there is substantial evidence of probative

value from which a reasonable trier of fact could have drawn the conclusion

that the defendant was guilty of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt,

the judgment will not be disturbed. Baumgartner v. State, 891 N.E.2d 1131, 1137

(Ind. Ct. App. 2008).

[6] In order to support Davis’s conviction for Class B misdemeanor disorderly

conduct, the State was required to prove that Davis recklessly, knowingly, or

intentionally made unreasonable noise and continued to do so after being asked

to stop. See Ind. Code § 35-45-1-3(a)(2); Martin v. State, 499 N.E.2d 273, 275

(Ind. Ct. App. 1986) (explaining that “[t]o convict for disorderly conduct, the

trier of fact must find that there was unreasonable noise, followed by an

admonition to stop, which was in turn followed by more unreasonable noise”).

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A04-1706-CR-1293 | January 24, 2018 Page 3 of 4 [7] Davis does not dispute that he made unreasonable noise, but he argues that no

evidence was presented to establish that Officer Shue or anyone else ever told

him to stop. The State concedes as much and agrees that Davis’s disorderly

conduct conviction must be reversed. Accordingly, we reverse and remand

with instructions to vacate Davis’s disorderly conduct conviction and the

sentence imposed thereon. Because the trial court imposed concurrent

sentences, Davis’s aggregate sentence will not be affected.

[8] Judgment reversed in part and remanded with instructions.

May, J. and Vaidik, C.J., concur.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A04-1706-CR-1293 | January 24, 2018 Page 4 of 4