Latasha Jenkins v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

• Court: Indiana Court of Appeals
• Decided: March 11, 2016
• Docket: 49A05-1508-CR-1168
• Status: Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), Mar 11 2016, 9:24 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.

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Barbara J. Simmons Gregory F. Zoeller Oldenburg, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana Ruth Johnson Jesse Robert Drum Marion County Public Defender’s Office Lyubov Gore Indianapolis, Indiana Deputy Attorney Generals Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Latasha Jenkins, March 11, 2016 Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No. 49A05-1508-CR-1168 v. Appeal from the Marion Superior Court State of Indiana, The Honorable Leah Cannon, Appellee-Plaintiff. Judge Pro-Tem Trial Court Cause No. 49G10-1412-CM-55588

Pyle, Judge.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A05-1508-CR-1168 | March 11, 2016 Page 1 of 4 Statement of the Case [1] Appellant-defendant Latasha Jenkins (“Jenkins”) appeals her conviction of

Class B misdemeanor criminal mischief for slashing two of Brandie Davis’

(“Davis”) tires. She challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support her

conviction. Concluding that the evidence is sufficient to support Jenkins’

conviction, and because her arguments amount to nothing more than

invitations to reweigh the evidence, we affirm.

[2] We affirm.

Issue Whether there is sufficient evidence to support Jenkins’ conviction of Class B misdemeanor criminal mischief.

Facts [3] Jenkins and Marcus Lynam (“Lynam”) dated for eight years and have a child

together. In November 2014, Lynam owed Jenkins “hundreds of dollars and

more” of child support. (Tr. 45). At that time, Lynam was married to Davis,

and Jenkins lived three blocks away from them.

[4] At approximately 7:15 a.m. on November 19, 2014, Davis and her neighbor left

the apartment building where they both lived to get into Davis’ car. As they

approached the car, both woman saw Jenkins crouched down by the car’s tires

with an object in her hands. When Jenkins saw the women, she ran to a nearby

car and drove away. When Davis and her neighbor reached the car, they

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A05-1508-CR-1168 | March 11, 2016 Page 2 of 4 discovered that two of Davis’ tires had been slashed. Two days later, Jenkins

called Davis and told her that “if she [did not] get her child support money she

[was] going to keep costing [Davis] money.” (Tr. 11). Davis’ neighbor

identified Jenkins in a photo array.

[5] The State charged Jenkins with Class B misdemeanor criminal mischief. At her

bench trial, the State presented evidence reflecting the above facts. Jenkins

testified that she slept until 7:30 a.m. or 7:45 a.m. on November 19. She also

testified that at 5’4” tall and 375 pounds, she would not have been able to run

anywhere. The trial court convicted her as charged and sentenced her to 180

days, with two (2) days credit time and 178 days suspended. Davis appeals her

conviction.

Decision [6] Jenkins argues that there is insufficient evidence to support her conviction. Our

standard of review for sufficiency of the evidence is well-settled. When

reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence needed to support a criminal

conviction, we neither reweigh the evidence nor judge witness credibility.

Henley v. State, 881 N.E.2d 639, 652 (Ind. 2008). We consider only the evidence

supporting the judgment and any reasonable inferences that can be drawn from

such evidence. Id. We will affirm a conviction if there is substantial evidence

of probative value such that a reasonable trier of fact could have concluded the

defendant was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Id.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A05-1508-CR-1168 | March 11, 2016 Page 3 of 4 [7] To convict Jenkins of Class B misdemeanor criminal mischief, the State was

required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Jenkins knowingly or

intentionally damaged or defaced Davis’ tires without Davis’ consent. See IND.

CODE § 35-43-1-2(a). Our review of the evidence reveals that both Davis and

her neighbor testified that they saw Jenkins crouched down by Davis’ tires

holding an object. When Jenkins saw the women, she ran and got into a car.

When Davis and her neighbor reached the car, they discovered that two tires

had been slashed. Jenkins contacted Davis two days later and told her that she

would “keep costing [Davis] money” if she was not paid her child support. (Tr.

11). Davis’ neighbor identified Jenkins in a photo array. This evidence is

sufficient to support Jenkins’ conviction.

[8] Jenkins’ arguments that it was “dark on the early morning of November 19,

2014, which would make it difficult to identify the person near Ms. Davis’ car,”

and that at 5’4” tall and 375 pounds, “she was not physically capable to ‘run’

away from anything,” are invitations to reweigh the evidence. (Jenkin’s Br. 8).

This we cannot do. See Henley, 881 N.E.2d at 652.

[9] Affirmed.

Baker, J., and Bradford, J., concur.

Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A05-1508-CR-1168 | March 11, 2016 Page 4 of 4