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: BRIAN J. BELDING North Vernon, Indiana ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: STEPHEN R. CARTER Attorney General of Indiana Indianapolis, Indiana J.T. WHITEHEAD Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
ROGER L. BROOKS, Appellant-Defendant, vs. STATE OF INDIANA, Appellee-Plaintiff. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 40A01-0706-CR-271

APPEAL FROM THE JENNINGS CIRCUIT COURT The Honorable Jon W. Webster, Judge Cause No. 40C01-0608-FB-197

DECEMBER 26, 2007 MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION SULLIVAN, Senior Judge

STATEMENT OF THE CASE Defendant-Appellant Roger L. Brooks appeals the trial court's entry of judgment for burglary as a Class B felony. We affirm. ISSUE Brooks raises one issue for our review, which we restate as: Whether the State presented sufficient evidence to support the trial court's determination that Brooks burglarized a dwelling. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY The State charged Brooks with burglary of a dwelling, a Class B felony; nonresidential burglary, a Class C felony; theft, a Class D felony; and receiving stolen property, a Class D felony. Brooks entered a guilty plea to burglary on the condition that the sentencing court would determine whether the building he entered was a dwelling. At the hearing, George Corya testified that he lives on property known as Graham Creek Farms.1 The burglarized building is located on that property, and Corya testified that at different times, he lived full time in the building. The building was his home for one year while a new house was being built on the property, and it was again his home for five months after lightning struck the new house. There is an office in the building, and a portion of the building is used as a "shop" containing farm equipment, tools, and other equipment. (Appellant's App. at 57). The building also contains "full living

1

The information alleged that the burglarized building was the dwelling of Corya and his son, David.

2

facilities," including a washer-dryer, a bathroom, a television, a couch, several reclining chairs, a bedroom with a bed, a full kitchen, and a dining area. (App. at 51). Employees ate meals in the building, and visitors to the property sometimes stayed overnight in the building. Indeed, some weeks before the burglary, several of Corya's friends stayed in the building during hunting season. The sentencing court determined that the building was a dwelling, and it thus imposed the sentence for a Class B felony. DISCUSSION AND DECISION Ind. Code

Download Roger L. Brooks v. State of Indiana.pdf

Indiana Law