Moler v. State

782 N.E.2d 454, 2003 Ind. App. LEXIS 119, 2003 WL 194887
CourtIndiana Court of Appeals
DecidedJanuary 30, 2003
Docket39A04-0206-CR-272
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 782 N.E.2d 454 (Moler v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Moler v. State, 782 N.E.2d 454, 2003 Ind. App. LEXIS 119, 2003 WL 194887 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003).

Opinion

OPINION

BAKER, Judge.

Appellant-defendant Michael L. Moler appeals his conviction for Murder, 1 a felony, challenging sufficiency of the evidence. Specifically, Moler argues that his convietion may not stand because no witnesses testified that Moler was sane during the commission of his crime. Because we are constrained by our supreme court's holding in Barany v. State, we affirm.

FACTS

The facts most favorable to the verdict are that Moler was living with Neil Wright and Neil's mother, Nina Wright. Both Neil and Nina knew that Moler had schizophrenia, but both also knew that Moler functioned normally while on medication. Six months prior to the murder, Nina's mother, Ethel Cummins, moved into Nina's residence. Moler helped care for the elderly Cummins, and Neil and Nina trusted him to care for her.

On the morning of January 6, 1998, Jean Sarver and her husband dropped Moler off at Lifespring Mental Health Services for an injection of anti-psychotic medication. During the drive, Moler appeared normal and spoke with the Sarvers as usual. The Sarvers then drove to their shop, not far from Lifespring. After Moler received his medication, he walked to the Sarver's shop, whereupon Mr. Sarver drove Moler home.

That afternoon, Moler picked Neil up from work and drove him home. Moler, Neil, and Cummins spent the afternoon watching television. During this time, Moler appeared fine and behaved normally. When Neil and Nina had to run an errand that evening, they left Cummins in Moler's care.

Upon returning, however, Neil and Nina found Cummins lying next to the couch with blood everywhere. When Moler, standing at the kitchen sink, shirtless, saw Neil, he said, "I didn't mean to do it. She's a witch. She turned into a witch." Tr. p. 145. Neil hit Moler, who ran out of the house. Neil called for an ambulance, *456 which soon arrived. Police officers also appeared on the scene. Cummins was transported to a hospital.

After the ambulance left, Officer Keith Hartman of the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department was speaking with Indiana State Trooper George True. Moler approached the officers. Officer Hartman noticed that Moler was shirtless, had stains on his jeans, and had scratches on his knuckles and hands. Moler told the two officers that he had "just killed that woman." Tr. p. 87. Moler then told the officers that "she had turned into a witch and that he twisted her head around and killed her." Tr. p. 87. Madison Police Captain Daniel Stephan, who knew Moler and was also at the seene, heard his name being called by Moler. Captain Stephan walked to where Moler, Officer Hartman, and Officer True were standing. Moler went on to tell Captain Stephan that he had killed a witch. Tr. p. 181. At that point, Officer Hartman called a crime scene investigator.

Captain Stephan drove Moler to the Jefferson County Sheriffs Department. During the drive Moler appeared normal. Moler then began telling Captain Stephan how he attacked Cummins, though Captain Stephan repeatedly told Moler that Moler did not have to speak. After arriving at the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department, Moler was read his Miranda rights and signed a waiver form. Moler told Chief Deputy Sheriff Steve Henry that Cummins's hair "stood straight up." Tr. p. 212. Moler then "went over and started to twist her head around." Tr. p. 212. While he was doing this, "she turned into a witch, so he had to go ahead and kill her then." Tr. p. 212.

The State initially charged Moler with attempted murder and aggravated battery. However, Cummins died six days after the attack. As a result, the State amended the information and charged him with murder. On March 18, 1998, Moler filed a notice of an insanity defense. On May 19, 1998, the trial court found Moler competent to stand trial. Moler was tried three times: the first verdict of guilty but mentally ill was vacated by the trial court as a result of juror misconduct; the second trial commenced but was terminated due to media coverage, and venue was transferred to Ripley County; the third trial, held in Ripley County, ended with a hung jury.

A fourth trial began on February 19, 2002. Prior to trial, the court had appointed two mental health professionals to evaluate Moler's mental state. At trial, Dr. Don A. Olive-who met with Moler several times-testified that "as a result of [the] mental disease [Moler] was unable to appreciate the wrongfuilness of his conduct." Tr. p. 557-58. Dr. Rodney Deaton testified, after interviewing Moler and reviewing Moler's medical records, that Moler was insane at the time of the killing. Tr. p. 641-42.

Even though both experts testified that Moler could not grasp the unlawfulness of his acts, Moler's account to police regarding a "witch" remained consistent, and the forensic evidence showed that Cummins's head had indeed been "twisted," Moler was found guilty but mentally ill of both murder and aggravated battery. The trial court merged the aggravated battery conviction with the murder conviction. Moler was sentenced to the Department of Correction for fifty-five years, three of which were suspended. He now appeals.

DISCUSSION AND DECISION

Moler argues that his conviction may not stand because the State presented no evidence demonstrating that he was sane at the time of the crime. Specifically, Moler notes that while both expert witnesses testified that he was mentally ill at the time *457 he killed Cummins, the State was unable to present witnesses to testify about his mental state at the time he committed the crime.

We first note that Moler never denied actually striking and killing Cummins. Rather, Moler's theory of defense was that he was insane at the time of the offense, thereby vitiating his culpability. For his insanity defense to succeed, Moler had to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that "as a result of mental disease or defect, he was unable to appreciate the wrongfulness of the conduct at the time of the offense." - Ind.Code § 35-41-3-6(a); Robinette v. State, 741 N.E.2d 1162, 1167 (Ind.2001).

In addressing Moler's claim that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction, we neither reweigh the evidence nor assess the credibility of the witnesses. Brasher v. State, 746 N.E.2d 71, 72 (Ind.2001). Rather, we look to the evidence most favorable to the verdict and the reasonable inferences therefrom. Id. A defendant who appeals a verdiet rejecting the defense of insanity must demonstrate that "the evidence was without conflict and led only to the conclusion that the defendant was insane when the crime was committed." Robinette, 741 N.E.2d at 1167. Furthermore, the jury may discount the testimony of experts in determining whether the defendant was insane at the time of the crime and rely on the testimony of lay witnesses. Id.

The facts of this case are remarkably similar to those in Barany v. State, where our supreme court upheld a conviction notwithstanding unanimous expert opinion that the defendant was insane at the time he 'killed his live-in companion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Lori Barcroft v. State of Indiana
89 N.E.3d 448 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2017)
Michael Miller v. State of Indiana
72 N.E.3d 502 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2017)
Lawson v. State
966 N.E.2d 1273 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2012)
Lathisha Lawson v. State of Indiana
Indiana Court of Appeals, 2012
Carson v. State
963 N.E.2d 670 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2012)
Luke Keys Carson v. State of Indiana
Indiana Court of Appeals, 2012
Galloway v. State
938 N.E.2d 699 (Indiana Supreme Court, 2010)
Thompson v. State
804 N.E.2d 1146 (Indiana Supreme Court, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
782 N.E.2d 454, 2003 Ind. App. LEXIS 119, 2003 WL 194887, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moler-v-state-indctapp-2003.