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: JOSEPH F. THOMS Thoms & Thoms Indianapolis, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: STEVE CARTER Attorney General of Indiana GARY D. SECREST Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

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

No. 49A02-0701-CR-27

APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable Linda E. Brown, Judge Cause No. 49F10-0607-CM-121430

August 6, 2007 MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION VAIDIK, Judge

Case Summary Darrell Taylor ("Taylor") appeals his convictions for resisting law enforcement as a Class A misdemeanor and disorderly conduct as a class B misdemeanor. Concluding that the evidence is sufficient to sustain Taylor's convictions, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. Facts and Procedural History In the early afternoon of June 16, 2006, Indianapolis Police Officer Steven Hayth ("Officer Hayth") was standing next to his police car in the parking lot of Community East Hospital when he heard someone from a distance say, "Yeah, that's him." Tr. p. 7. Officer Hayth, who could not initially see who had made the comment but thought that the comment was directed toward him, went inside the emergency room garage area, which was about twenty feet from his police car, to wait for the people to pass and see who had made the comment. When a couple approached his car, Officer Hayth

recognized Taylor and his fianc

Download Darrell Taylor v. State of Indiana.pdf

Indiana Law