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: LISA M. JOHNSON Marion County Public Defender Agency Indianapolis, Indiana ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: STEVE CARTER Attorney General of Indiana JUSTIN F. ROEBEL Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
RONNIE C. WILLIAMS, Appellant-Defendant, vs. STATE OF INDIANA, Appellee-Plaintiff. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 49A02-0703-CR-274

APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT The Honorable Robert R. Altice, Jr., Judge Cause No. 49G02-0512-FA-212629

December 5, 2007 MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

BRADFORD, Judge

Following a jury trial, Appellant-Defendant Ronnie Williams appeals his convictions and aggregate ninety-four-year sentence for two counts of Attempted Murder, a Class A felony (Counts I and II); 1 Robbery as a Class B felony (Count III); 2 four counts of Criminal Confinement as a Class B felony (Counts IV, V, VI, and VII); 3 Resisting Law Enforcement as a Class D felony (Count IX); 4 Residential Entry as a Class D felony (Count X); 5 and Carrying a Handgun Without a License as a Class A misdemeanor (Count XIV). 6 (Tr. 990-91; App. 4, 23-24) Upon appeal, Williams

challenges his attempted murder conviction in Count II on the grounds that the trial court failed to instruct the jury properly regarding accomplice liability, and he seeks to bar retrial by claiming there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction. Williams further challenges his attempted murder convictions in both Counts I and II by claiming the trial court abused its discretion in admitting certain opinion testimony and in refusing his criminal recklessness instruction. Additionally, Williams appeals his convictions for criminal confinement in Counts IV and V on the basis that they violate double jeopardy. Lastly, Williams challenges the appropriateness of his sentence. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand. BACKGROUND FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS On December 7, 2005, at approximately 10:00 a.m., two masked men entered the Flagstar Bank at 71st Street and Binford Boulevard in Indianapolis. Each man, one in a
1 2

Ind. Code

Download Ronnie C. Williams v. State of Indiana.pdf

Indiana Law