Preview:

Pursuant to Ind.Appellate Rule 65(D), 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.

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: ZACHARY A. WITTE Fort Wayne, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: STEVE CARTER Attorney General of Indiana MARA MCCABE Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
CRAIG WILSON, Appellant-Defendant, vs. STATE OF INDIANA, Appellee-Plaintiff. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 02A03-0610-CR-510

APPEAL FROM THE ALLEN SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable John F. Surbeck, Jr., Judge Cause No. 02D04-0511-FB-167

June 13, 2007 MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

BARNES, Judge

Case Summary Craig Wilson appeals his convictions for two counts of Class B felony burglary. We affirm. Issue The sole issue Wilson raises on appeal is whether the evidence was sufficient to convict him of two counts of burglary. Facts On November 22, 2005, at about 8:45 p.m., Sergeant Joel Squadrito and Officer Cesar DeJesus of the Fort Wayne police department were patrolling a residential area in an unmarked patrol car for the purpose of burglary suppression. Sergeant Squadrito saw a black male, later identified as Wilson, in dark clothing walking through an alley and carrying a square item under his left arm. The officers turned down the alley, and within ten to fifteen seconds Wilson started running away. Officer DeJesus proceeded on foot after Wilson. Sergeant Squadrito broadcast on the radio that they were chasing a

burglary suspect; he described the suspect and the direction in which the suspect was running. Meanwhile, Officer DeJesus lost sight of Wilson but found a DVD player on the ground in the alley through which Wilson had just passed. Within five or six seconds after Sergeant Squadrito broadcast the description of the suspect, Officers Nicklow and Hughs, who were patrolling nearby, saw a suspect fitting the description and running in the direction given by Sergeant Squadrito. The officers radioed that they were in pursuit of the suspect. Officer Nicklow chased Wilson on foot down the street and through some 2

residential lawns. He never lost sight of Wilson during the chase. Wilson stumbled into the side of a police car belonging to another officer, Kevin Weber, who was also in the area responding to Sergeant Squadrito's broadcast. Wilson got up and ran around the car, and Officer Weber could see that Wilson was empty-handed. Wilson entered a vacant home through a basement window. The officers surrounded the home and entered it to apprehend Wilson. Officers found a set of keys on the floor about five feet away from Wilson. Inside the vacant home, a dark coat was also found. In the yard adjacent to the vacant home, a dark hat was discovered. Earlier that evening, at about 7:30 p.m., Louise Dietzer-Hensley discovered that her home had been broken into while she was at work; she lived about two blocks away from the area in which Sergeant Squadrito originally saw Wilson. Dietzer-Hensley's home had been entered through a basement window. The window and a security bar that ran across the window had been broken. She discovered that a DVD recorder and a set of spare keys were missing. The keys were later confirmed to be the same keys that were found near Wilson in the vacant home where he was apprehended. Her DVD recorder was not recovered. At about 11:15 p.m., after Wilson had been arrested, Dennis Osmun discovered that his home had also been broken into while he was at work; he lived about 50 feet from the area in which Sergeant Squadrito first saw Wilson. Osmun's home had also been entered through a basement window. The window glass had been removed and the screen was cut. Osmun discovered that he was missing a DVD player, which officers

3

later identified by the serial number as the same DVD player that Officer DeJesus had found while pursuing Wilson in an adjacent alley several hours earlier. Wilson was charged with two counts of Class B felony burglary, two counts of Class D felony possession of stolen property, and two counts of Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement. A jury found him guilty on all counts. The trial court merged the two possession of stolen property counts with the two burglary counts. The trial court sentenced Wilson to fifteen years for each burglary conviction, to be served consecutively, and one year for each resisting law enforcement conviction, to be served concurrent with one another but consecutive to the burglary convictions. Wilson now appeals his burglary convictions. Analysis Wilson argues that the evidence was insufficient to convict him of either burglary count. 1 When reviewing a claim of insufficient evidence, we neither reweigh the

evidence nor judge the credibility of witnesses. Trimble v. State, 848 N.E.2d 278, 279 (Ind. 2006). We will affirm if the probative evidence and reasonable inferences drawn therefrom could have allowed a reasonable trier of fact to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Williams v. State, 834 N.E.2d 225, 229 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005).

1

Wilson also briefly argues that there was insufficient evidence to prove that he was guilty of the two counts of possession of stolen property. However, the trial court found that those two counts merged with the burglary counts and did not enter a judgment of conviction for the counts of possession of stolen property. Because Wilson did not receive convictions for these counts, we will not address his argument that there was insufficient evidence to support them.

4

In order to convict Wilson of burglary, the State had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he broke and entered the building or structure of another person with intent to commit a felony in it. See Ind. Code

Download Craig Wilson v. State of Indiana.pdf

Indiana Law