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.

FILED
Nov 26 2008, 9:04 am
of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

CLERK

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: ARVIL R. HOWE South Bend, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: STEVE CARTER Attorney General of Indiana SHELLEY M. JOHNSON Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

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

No. 71A03-0804-CR-178

APPEAL FROM THE ST. JOSEPH SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable Roland W. Chamblee, Jr., Judge Cause No. 71D08-0605-FD-515

November 26, 2008

MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

NAJAM, Judge

STATEMENT OF THE CASE Michael Baker appeals his conviction for Possession of Cocaine, as a Class D felony, following a jury trial.1 Baker presents a single issue for review, namely, whether the evidence is sufficient to support his conviction for possession of cocaine. We affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On May 11, 2006, Officer Timothy Huff of the South Bend Police Department began surveillance of 2105 South Michigan Street in South Bend. Officer Huff was a member of the Metro Special Operations Section Narcotics Unit, and he was watching the South Michigan Street house to apprehend the resident outside of the house before executing a narcotics search warrant. The officer began watching the house at

approximately 9:00 a.m. No one entered or exited the house until 2:40 p.m., when Officer Huff saw Baker leave the house. Officer Huff, who was in an unmarked car and dressed in plain clothes, approached Baker, identified himself to Baker as a police officer, and read Baker a Miranda warning. After receiving the Miranda warning, Baker stated that he had been living in the house for the past four or five months; that he stayed in the bedroom twentyfour hours a day, seven days a week at times; and that he had last seen crack cocaine on the previous evening, when he had purchased $80 worth of crack. Officer Huff then interviewed Baker while other officers searched the premises. In the kitchen area officers found a dinner plate, which had Baker's fingerprint on it, and ten small packages
The jury also found Baker guilty of Maintaining a Common Nuisance, as a Class D felony, but Baker does not appeal that conviction.
1

2

wrapped in foil containing cocaine. In a bedroom that contained Baker's clothes and effects, officers found an exemplar of the foil (a gum wrapper) that held the cocaine in the kitchen as well as a letter from an attorney addressed to Baker at the house's street address. The State charged Baker with possession of cocaine and maintaining a common nuisance, both as Class D felonies. A jury found Baker guilty as charged, and the trial court entered judgment of conviction accordingly. The court sentenced Baker to three years on each count, to be served concurrently. Baker now appeals. DISCUSSION AND DECISION Baker contends that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction for possession of cocaine. When reviewing a 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 verdict and the reasonable inferences that may be drawn from that evidence 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. The State charged Baker with possession of cocaine, as a Class D felony. To convict Baker of that offense, the State was required to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Baker knowingly possessed cocaine (pure or adulterated) weighing less than three (3) grams. Ind. Code

Download 11260803ewn.pdf

Indiana Law