Todd A. Gray, Jr. v. State of Indiana ( 2012 )


Menu:
  • 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
    FILED
    Feb 17 2012, 8:54 am
    establishing the defense of res judicata,
    collateral estoppel, or the law of the case.                        CLERK
    of the supreme court,
    court of appeals and
    tax court
    ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT:                          ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE:
    SEAN P. HILGENDORF                               GREGORY F. ZOELLER
    South Bend, Indiana                              Attorney General of Indiana
    ERIC P. BABBS
    Deputy Attorney General
    Indianapolis, Indiana
    IN THE
    COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
    TODD A. GRAY, JR.,                               )
    )
    Appellant-Defendant,                      )
    )
    vs.                                )        No. 71A05-1106-CR-308
    )
    STATE OF INDIANA,                                )
    )
    Appellee-Plaintiff.                       )
    APPEAL FROM THE ST. JOSEPH SUPERIOR COURT
    The Honorable John M. Marnocha, Judge
    Cause No. 71D02-1011-FB-159
    February 17, 2012
    MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION
    NAJAM, Judge
    STATEMENT OF THE CASE
    Todd A. Gray, Jr., appeals his conviction for attempted robbery, as a Class B
    felony, following a jury trial. Gray raises a single issue for our review, namely, whether
    the State presented sufficient evidence to support his conviction. We affirm.
    FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY1
    On November 19, 2010, Keenan Anderson2 told several people that he was going
    to “hit me a lick today,” which meant that he was going to rob someone. Transcript at
    329-30. Later that day, Gray drove Anderson and another of Anderson’s friends, Lee
    Lewis, in Gray’s green minivan to the Anchor Inn, a restaurant in South Bend. There,
    Gray parked the van in a corner of the parking lot. The three men waited for about
    twenty minutes for someone to exit so that Lewis could “get some money.” Id. at 343.
    Jerry Burrow then exited the restaurant. As he began to get into his car, he heard
    someone behind him ask for a cigarette. He turned around and saw Anderson and Lewis,
    one of whom was pointing a gun at his face. Burrow said, “Get that BB gun out of my
    face” and deflected the firearm away. Id. at 155. Burrow then realized that the gun “was
    not a BB gun.” Id. at 170. Either Anderson or Lewis then tried to hit Burrow in the head
    with the gun, but Burrow deflected the attack. Anderson and Lewis then retreated to
    Gray’s van, and Burrow ran back inside the restaurant and called the police.
    Shortly thereafter, South Bend Police Department Officer Neil Graber identified
    Gray’s van as the one described by Burrow in his call. Officer Graber initiated a traffic
    1
    Gray’s statement of facts in his appellate brief is not consistent with our standard of review.
    See Ind. Appellate Rule 46(A)(6)(b). As such, we do not consider it.
    2
    Anderson’s first name is alternatively spelled “Kennan” and “Keenan” in the record. Transcript
    at 150, 327.
    2
    stop. Officer Graber arrested Gray, Anderson, and Lewis. He then backtracked into an
    alley where he had seen the van exit to “see if we could locate anything that they might
    have been able to toss while they were out of my vision.” Id. at 209. There, Officer
    Graber found “a semi-auto black handgun that was also the same description of what was
    described” by Burrow. Id. at 210.
    On November 20, the State charged Gray with attempted robbery, as a Class B
    felony. After a trial in May of 2011, a jury found Gray guilty as charged. This appeal
    ensued.
    DISCUSSION AND DECISION
    Gray contends that the State failed to present sufficient evidence to support his
    conviction. 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.
    To prove attempted robbery, as a Class B felony, the State was required to show
    beyond a reasonable doubt that Gray, or his accomplice, took a substantial step toward
    the knowing or intentional taking of property from another person by using or threatening
    to use force on that person. 
    Ind. Code §§ 35-41-2-4
     (accomplice liability); 35-41-5-1(a)
    3
    (attempt); 35-42-5-1 (robbery). The offense is a Class B felony if committed while
    armed with a deadly weapon. I.C. § 35-42-5-1.
    On appeal, Gray first argues that the State failed to prove that Anderson or Lewis
    had the requisite intent to rob Burrow. Gray’s argument on this issue wholly ignores the
    State’s evidence that Anderson had stated to several people earlier on the day in question
    that he intended to rob someone later that day. As such, Gray’s argument here must fail.
    Gray next asserts that the State failed to show that a firearm, rather than a BB gun,
    was used in the commission of the offense. Again, Gray ignores the evidence. Burrow
    testified that he recognized the firearm as a gun, not a BB gun, and Officer Graber
    testified that he found a firearm matching Burrow’s description in an alley where he had
    witnessed Gray exit in his van. Thus, the State presented sufficient evidence that the
    crime was committed with a deadly weapon.
    Last, Gray contends that he did not knowingly aid his confederates in the
    commission of the attempted crime. Gray ignores the fact that he, Anderson, and Lewis
    lay in wait at the Anchor Inn parking lot for twenty minutes until someone exited so that
    Lewis could “get some money.” Transcript at 343. Gray likewise ignores the State’s
    evidence that Officer Graber observed Gray drive the get-away vehicle out of the alley in
    which the firearm was found. Gray’s arguments on appeal amount to a request for this
    court either to ignore or discredit the evidence most favorable to the State, which we will
    not do. The State presented sufficient evidence to support Gray’s conviction.
    Affirmed.
    ROBB, C.J., and VAIDIK, J., concur.
    4
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 71A05-1106-CR-308

Filed Date: 2/17/2012

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021