Preview:

FOR PUBLICATION

FILED
Nov 13 2009, 9:39 am
of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

CLERK

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: ELIZABETH A. GABIG Marion County Public Defender Agency Indianapolis, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: GREGORY F. ZOELLER Attorney General of Indiana ANN L. GOODWIN Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

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

No. 49A02-0904-CR-359

APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable Steven J. Rubick, Judge Pro Tempore Cause No. 49F10-0804-CM-98377

November 13, 2009

OPINION - FOR PUBLICATION

NAJAM, Judge

STATEMENT OF THE CASE Curtis Colvin appeals his conviction for Resisting Law Enforcement, as a Class A misdemeanor, following a bench trial. He presents a single issue for our review, namely, whether the State presented sufficient evidence to support his conviction. We reverse. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On March 26, 2008, officers with the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department executed a search warrant on an apartment in Indianapolis. When officers knocked on the apartment door, a woman let them inside. Colvin was in the living room at the time, within view of the officers. One of the officers ordered Colvin to take his hands out of his pockets, but Colvin did not comply. Colvin refused to comply with any of the officers commands, and the officers "physically had to place him on the ground and handcuff him." marijuana. The State charged Colvin with possession of marijuana and resisting law enforcement. Following a bench trial, the trial court found him guilty as charged. Colvin now appeals his resisting law enforcement conviction. DISCUSSION AND DECISION Colvin contends that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction. When reviewing the claim of sufficiency of the evidence, we do not reweigh the evidence or judge the credibility of the witnesses. Jones v. State, 783 N.E.2d 1132, 1139 (Ind. 2003). We look only to the probative evidence supporting the judgment and the reasonable
2

Transcript at 15.

Colvin subsequently admitted to possessing

inferences therein to determine whether a reasonable trier of fact could conclude the defendant was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Id. If there is substantial evidence of probative value to support the conviction, it will not be set aside. Id. To prove resisting law enforcement, as a Class A misdemeanor, the State was required to prove that Colvin knowingly and forcibly resisted, obstructed, or interfered with an officer while said officer was lawfully engaged in the execution of his duties as a law enforcement officer. See Ind. Code

Download Curtis Colvin v. State of Indiana.pdf

Indiana Law