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: DAVID PARDO Marion County Public Defender Agency Indianapolis, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: STEVE CARTER Attorney General of Indiana CYNTHIA L. PLOUGHE Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

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

No. 49A05-0605-CR-278

APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable Mark Stoner, Judge Cause No. 49F09-0412-FD-219765

December 28, 2006

MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

CRONE, Judge

Case Summary Keith Harris appeals his conviction of auto theft, a class D felony. We affirm. Issue We restate the issue as whether the evidence was sufficient to convict Harris of auto theft. Facts and Procedural History The facts most favorable to the verdict are as follows. On December 4, 2004, at about 8:00 p.m., Kevin Ruble parked his black 1984 BMW in his driveway in Indianapolis. About an hour and a half later, he noticed that his car was no longer there and reported the vehicle stolen. Officer Keith Minch came to Ruble's house and took his statement. Minutes later, Sergeant Steven Cheh was waiting at a traffic signal when he noticed a vehicle approach the intersection and then stall. Concerned that the vehicle would block the intersection, Cheh continued his observation, noting that the driver was the sole occupant of the vehicle. At one point, as the vehicle passed him, Sergeant Cheh looked the driver in the eye and noticed the man mouth the words, "Oh Shit." Tr. at 35. As the vehicle drove away, Sergeant Cheh realized that the car was a black BMW and recalled the earlier report of a stolen vehicle of the same model. Sergeant Cheh turned on his lights and closely pursued the vehicle. Turning a corner just seconds behind, Sergeant Cheh came upon the BMW, which had stopped in the middle of the road. Sergeant Cheh, seeing that the occupant of the car was attempting to climb out the vehicle's passenger door, drew his weapon and ordered the man to the ground. The man, later identified as Harris, complied and was arrested. The officer noted that no one else was nearby who matched the description of the man he had seen
2

driving the vehicle. Thus, at around 10:00 p.m., Ruble's BMW was recovered just three miles away from his home. On April 12, 2006, a jury found Harris guilty of auto theft, a class D felony. Harris now appeals. Discussion and Decision Harris asserts that the evidence was insufficient to convict him of auto theft. Our standard for review is well established: In reviewing a claim of insufficient evidence, we will affirm a conviction unless, considering only the evidence and reasonable inferences favorable to the judgment, and neither reweighing the evidence nor assessing the credibility of the witnesses, we conclude that no reasonable fact-finder could find the elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Winn v. State, 748 N.E.2d 352, 357 (Ind. 2001). To obtain a conviction for auto theft, the State had to prove that Harris knowingly or intentionally exerted unauthorized control over Ruble's vehicle, with intent to deprive him of the vehicle's value or use. Ind. Code

Download Keith Harris v. State of Indiana.pdf

Indiana Law