MEMORANDUM DECISION FILED Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), Apr 11 2018, 9:19 am this Memorandum Decision shall not be CLERK regarded as precedent or cited before any Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals court except for the purpose of establishing and Tax Court
the defense of res judicata, collateral estoppel, or the law of the case.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Michelle F. Kraus Curtis T. Hill, Jr. Fort Wayne, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana Caryn N. Szyper Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Lawrence J. Hill, April 11, 2018 Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No. 02A04-1707-CR-1690 v. Appeal from the Allen Superior Court State of Indiana, The Honorable John F. Surbeck, Appellee-Plaintiff Judge Trial Court Cause No. 02D04-1608-F3-50
Baker, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A04-1707-CR-1690 | April 11, 2018 Page 1 of 7 [1] Lawrence Hill appeals his convictions for Level 3 Felony Robbery1 and Level 3
Felony Attempted Robbery,2 arguing that the evidence is insufficient to support
his convictions. Finding the evidence sufficient, we affirm.
Facts [2] Around 10:30 p.m. on August 23, 2016, Gabriella Chandler was cleaning the
lobby of the McDonald’s where she worked in Fort Wayne when Hill entered
the restaurant. Gabriella knew Hill because he had previously worked there,
and he still visited to socialize after he started working at the Burger King
across the street. Hill was wearing his Burger King uniform when he entered,
which consisted of a black shirt with a Burger King logo, black pants, and a
Burger King hat. Gabriella greeted Hill and spoke with him briefly. Hill then
went to the restroom and Gabriella resumed cleaning the lobby. Shortly
thereafter, Hill exited the bathroom, stopped in the lobby, looked around, and
then left the restaurant through the side entrance.
[3] About twenty-five minutes later, just before the McDonald’s would close for the
evening, a masked gunman, later identified as Hill, entered through the side
entrance, walked around the front counter, and grabbed Gabriella by the back
of her neck. Hill was wearing a white long-sleeved shirt, a black ski mask, black
gloves, and black pants, and he was carrying a black semi-automatic handgun.
1 Ind. Code § 35-42-5-1(a). 2 Id.; Ind. Code § 35-41-5-1(a).
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A04-1707-CR-1690 | April 11, 2018 Page 2 of 7 Hill shoved Gabriella toward the office in the back of the restaurant, put the
gun to her head, and demanded money from the safe. Gabriella said,
“Lawrence, I don’t have my keys.” Tr. Vol. I p. 110. With the gun still to
Gabriella’s head, Hill responded, “that’s not me, I’m not Lawrence.” Id. at
111. He pulled the trigger, but the gun did not fire.
[4] Alisha Duke, another McDonald’s employee who had worked with Hill, also
recognized Hill and confronted him during the exchange in the office. She told
him, “Lawrence, this is not funny, it’s not cute, you need to leave.” Id. at 185.
Hill then grabbed Duke by the throat, put the gun to her head, and said, “you
don’t know who I am, my name is not Lawrence.” Id. He pulled the trigger,
but again, the gun did not fire.
[5] Meanwhile, Gabriella escaped the office and retrieved her cell phone from the
front counter. Hill approached her and took her phone. Hill then grabbed
Gabriella by the back of her neck, shoved her toward a cash register, and
demanded that she get the money from it. Gabriella said, “Lawrence, there’s
no money in this drawer.” Id. at 113. When Hill demanded money from the
next cash register, Gabriella told him, “Lawrence, I’m not giving you any
money.” Id. at 114. Myles Chandler, another McDonald’s employee, entered
the restaurant and saw Hill pointing a gun at Gabriella. As Myles approached
the counter, Hill released Gabriella and exited through the lobby’s side door.
[6] Hill was arrested shortly thereafter. While sitting in the back of the police car,
he asked the police officer why he was being detained. The officer told Hill that
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A04-1707-CR-1690 | April 11, 2018 Page 3 of 7 he had been identified as the person who robbed the McDonald’s. Hill
responded that he did not do it and asked, “how could they identify him if the
subject was wearing a mask?” Id. at 240. The officer replied that he “never said
anything about a mask.” Id. Hill then said that he would “have to be pretty
stupid to rob somebody I know without a mask.” Id.
[7] On August 29, 2016, the State charged Hill with Level 3 felony robbery and
Level 3 felony attempted robbery. A jury trial took place on May 31 and June
1, 2017. During the trial, Gabriella identified Hill as the robber; she testified
that she recognized Hill by his height, build, eyes, and voice, and therefore
addressed Hill by name several times throughout the robbery. Duke also
identified Hill as the robber; she testified that she recognized him by his voice
and therefore also called him by name during the robbery.
[8] McKenna Meyer, another McDonald’s employee, testified that she saw the
masked robber walk inside and hold a gun to Gabriella’s head. Meyer also
knew Hill from when he was employed at McDonald’s, and she concluded that
Hill was the robber based upon the height, physical build, and “familiar” eyes
of the robber. Id. at 51. Myles also knew Hill from Hill’s employment at
McDonald’s and from times when Hill had visited the restaurant. Myles
testified that the robber was tall and skinny, that Hill’s build was “almost
identical” to the robber’s, and that Hill’s height “perfectly” matched the
robber’s. Id. at 79. Alisha Weemes, the general manager of the Burger King
where Hill worked, also testified. Although Weemes did not witness the crime,
she reviewed the surveillance footage of it. She testified that through working
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A04-1707-CR-1690 | April 11, 2018 Page 4 of 7 with Hill, she became familiar with his style of walking, his build, and his
mannerisms. She further testified that she believed Hill was the robber.
[9] The jury found Hill guilty as charged. On June 30, 2017, the trial court
imposed concurrent sentences of ten years, with seven years executed and three
years suspended to probation, for each offense. Hill now appeals.
Discussion and Decision [10] Hill’s sole argument on appeal is that there is insufficient evidence supporting
his convictions for robbery and attempted robbery. Specifically, he argues that
the evidence does not show that he was the person who committed the
robberies. When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a
conviction, we must consider only the probative evidence and reasonable
inferences supporting the conviction. Drane v. State, 867 N.E.2d 144, 146 (Ind.
2007). We do not assess witness credibility or reweigh the evidence. Id. We
consider conflicting evidence most favorably to the trial court’s ruling. Id. We
affirm the conviction unless no reasonable factfinder could find the elements of
the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
MEMORANDUM DECISION FILED Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), Apr 11 2018, 9:19 am this Memorandum Decision shall not be CLERK regarded as precedent or cited before any Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals court except for the purpose of establishing and Tax Court
the defense of res judicata, collateral estoppel, or the law of the case.
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Michelle F. Kraus Curtis T. Hill, Jr. Fort Wayne, Indiana Attorney General of Indiana Caryn N. Szyper Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Lawrence J. Hill, April 11, 2018 Appellant-Defendant, Court of Appeals Case No. 02A04-1707-CR-1690 v. Appeal from the Allen Superior Court State of Indiana, The Honorable John F. Surbeck, Appellee-Plaintiff Judge Trial Court Cause No. 02D04-1608-F3-50
Baker, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A04-1707-CR-1690 | April 11, 2018 Page 1 of 7 [1] Lawrence Hill appeals his convictions for Level 3 Felony Robbery1 and Level 3
Felony Attempted Robbery,2 arguing that the evidence is insufficient to support
his convictions. Finding the evidence sufficient, we affirm.
Facts [2] Around 10:30 p.m. on August 23, 2016, Gabriella Chandler was cleaning the
lobby of the McDonald’s where she worked in Fort Wayne when Hill entered
the restaurant. Gabriella knew Hill because he had previously worked there,
and he still visited to socialize after he started working at the Burger King
across the street. Hill was wearing his Burger King uniform when he entered,
which consisted of a black shirt with a Burger King logo, black pants, and a
Burger King hat. Gabriella greeted Hill and spoke with him briefly. Hill then
went to the restroom and Gabriella resumed cleaning the lobby. Shortly
thereafter, Hill exited the bathroom, stopped in the lobby, looked around, and
then left the restaurant through the side entrance.
[3] About twenty-five minutes later, just before the McDonald’s would close for the
evening, a masked gunman, later identified as Hill, entered through the side
entrance, walked around the front counter, and grabbed Gabriella by the back
of her neck. Hill was wearing a white long-sleeved shirt, a black ski mask, black
gloves, and black pants, and he was carrying a black semi-automatic handgun.
1 Ind. Code § 35-42-5-1(a). 2 Id.; Ind. Code § 35-41-5-1(a).
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A04-1707-CR-1690 | April 11, 2018 Page 2 of 7 Hill shoved Gabriella toward the office in the back of the restaurant, put the
gun to her head, and demanded money from the safe. Gabriella said,
“Lawrence, I don’t have my keys.” Tr. Vol. I p. 110. With the gun still to
Gabriella’s head, Hill responded, “that’s not me, I’m not Lawrence.” Id. at
111. He pulled the trigger, but the gun did not fire.
[4] Alisha Duke, another McDonald’s employee who had worked with Hill, also
recognized Hill and confronted him during the exchange in the office. She told
him, “Lawrence, this is not funny, it’s not cute, you need to leave.” Id. at 185.
Hill then grabbed Duke by the throat, put the gun to her head, and said, “you
don’t know who I am, my name is not Lawrence.” Id. He pulled the trigger,
but again, the gun did not fire.
[5] Meanwhile, Gabriella escaped the office and retrieved her cell phone from the
front counter. Hill approached her and took her phone. Hill then grabbed
Gabriella by the back of her neck, shoved her toward a cash register, and
demanded that she get the money from it. Gabriella said, “Lawrence, there’s
no money in this drawer.” Id. at 113. When Hill demanded money from the
next cash register, Gabriella told him, “Lawrence, I’m not giving you any
money.” Id. at 114. Myles Chandler, another McDonald’s employee, entered
the restaurant and saw Hill pointing a gun at Gabriella. As Myles approached
the counter, Hill released Gabriella and exited through the lobby’s side door.
[6] Hill was arrested shortly thereafter. While sitting in the back of the police car,
he asked the police officer why he was being detained. The officer told Hill that
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A04-1707-CR-1690 | April 11, 2018 Page 3 of 7 he had been identified as the person who robbed the McDonald’s. Hill
responded that he did not do it and asked, “how could they identify him if the
subject was wearing a mask?” Id. at 240. The officer replied that he “never said
anything about a mask.” Id. Hill then said that he would “have to be pretty
stupid to rob somebody I know without a mask.” Id.
[7] On August 29, 2016, the State charged Hill with Level 3 felony robbery and
Level 3 felony attempted robbery. A jury trial took place on May 31 and June
1, 2017. During the trial, Gabriella identified Hill as the robber; she testified
that she recognized Hill by his height, build, eyes, and voice, and therefore
addressed Hill by name several times throughout the robbery. Duke also
identified Hill as the robber; she testified that she recognized him by his voice
and therefore also called him by name during the robbery.
[8] McKenna Meyer, another McDonald’s employee, testified that she saw the
masked robber walk inside and hold a gun to Gabriella’s head. Meyer also
knew Hill from when he was employed at McDonald’s, and she concluded that
Hill was the robber based upon the height, physical build, and “familiar” eyes
of the robber. Id. at 51. Myles also knew Hill from Hill’s employment at
McDonald’s and from times when Hill had visited the restaurant. Myles
testified that the robber was tall and skinny, that Hill’s build was “almost
identical” to the robber’s, and that Hill’s height “perfectly” matched the
robber’s. Id. at 79. Alisha Weemes, the general manager of the Burger King
where Hill worked, also testified. Although Weemes did not witness the crime,
she reviewed the surveillance footage of it. She testified that through working
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A04-1707-CR-1690 | April 11, 2018 Page 4 of 7 with Hill, she became familiar with his style of walking, his build, and his
mannerisms. She further testified that she believed Hill was the robber.
[9] The jury found Hill guilty as charged. On June 30, 2017, the trial court
imposed concurrent sentences of ten years, with seven years executed and three
years suspended to probation, for each offense. Hill now appeals.
Discussion and Decision [10] Hill’s sole argument on appeal is that there is insufficient evidence supporting
his convictions for robbery and attempted robbery. Specifically, he argues that
the evidence does not show that he was the person who committed the
robberies. When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a
conviction, we must consider only the probative evidence and reasonable
inferences supporting the conviction. Drane v. State, 867 N.E.2d 144, 146 (Ind.
2007). We do not assess witness credibility or reweigh the evidence. Id. We
consider conflicting evidence most favorably to the trial court’s ruling. Id. We
affirm the conviction unless no reasonable factfinder could find the elements of
the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Id.
[11] Identification testimony need not necessarily be unequivocal to sustain a
conviction. Heeter v. State, 661 N.E.2d 612, 616 (Ind. Ct. App. 1996).
Identification may be established entirely by circumstantial evidence and the
logical inferences drawn therefrom. Bustamante v. State, 557 N.E.2d 1313, 1317
(Ind. 1990). As with other sufficiency matters, we will not weigh the evidence
or resolve questions of credibility when determining whether the identification
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A04-1707-CR-1690 | April 11, 2018 Page 5 of 7 evidence is sufficient to sustain a conviction. Id. Rather, we examine the
evidence and the reasonable inferences therefrom that support the conviction.
Id.
[12] To convict Hill of Level 3 felony robbery, the State was required to prove
beyond a reasonable doubt that Hill knowingly took property from another
person by using or threatening the use of force on any person or by putting any
person in fear, and that he committed the offense while armed with a deadly
weapon. I.C. § 35-42-5-1(a). To convict Hill of Level 3 felony attempted
robbery, the State was required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Hill
knowingly engaged in conduct that constituted a substantial step toward
commission of a robbery. Id.; I.C. § 35-41-5-1(a).
[13] The crux of Hill’s insufficiency argument is that each witness who identified
him as the robber had previously provided statements to the police that
contradicted their testimony at trial and that, although the witnesses testified
that the robbery happened shortly before the restaurant closed at 11 p.m., the
video surveillance footage showed the robbery occurred at approximately 10:30
p.m. It is the factfinder’s role to assess the credibility of the witnesses and
weigh the evidence. Here, the State presented witnesses who identified Hill as
the robber. During the trial, Hill cross-examined each of the witnesses about
their identifications and raised the issue of the timestamp on the surveillance
footage. His argument on appeal is an invitation for us to assess the credibility
of the witnesses and to reweigh the evidence—an invitation we decline.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A04-1707-CR-1690 | April 11, 2018 Page 6 of 7 [14] Moreover, the State offered two eyewitnesses—Gabriella and Duke—who
unequivocally identified Hill as the robber. They both knew Hill from when he
worked at the McDonald’s and from his subsequent visits to the McDonald’s to
socialize after he started working at the Burger King across the street. Gabriella
testified that she recognized Hill by his height, build, eyes, and voice. Duke
testified that she recognized Hill by his voice. The other witnesses identified
Hill as well. Meyer testified that she concluded that the robber was Hill based
upon the height, physical build, and “familiar” eyes of the robber. Tr. Vol. I p.
51. Myles testified that Hill’s build—tall and skinny—matched that of the
robber. And Weemes testified that, after reviewing the video surveillance
footage, she believed Hill was the robber based on the build, gait, and
mannerisms that the robber shared with Hill. This identification evidence is
sufficient to support Hill’s convictions.
[15] The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Kirsch, J., and Bradford, J., concur.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 02A04-1707-CR-1690 | April 11, 2018 Page 7 of 7