ANDERSON v. STATE (2024)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Case Summary

[1] Following a jury trial, DeShae Anderson was convicted of murder, a felony. Anderson appeals and argues that the State failed to present evidence sufficient to identify him as the person who killed the victim. We disagree and, accordingly, affirm.

Issue

[2] Anderson presents one issue, which we restate as whether the evidence is sufficient to support his conviction for murder.

Facts

[3] In May 2021, Shaquarius Cooper lived in an apartment in Indianapolis. On the night of May 8, 2021, Cooper had several people over at her apartment, including the defendant, Anderson, as well as Jimario Williams and Keon Bowens. Cooper knew these men because they were all from the same town in Michigan. Williams and Bowens were in the kitchen of Cooper's apartment when Anderson entered and accused Williams of saying that Anderson had robbed a third party. Anderson then stabbed Williams in the chest. Williams fell to the ground, and Bowens attempted to help his injured friend. Cooper was in a back bedroom at this time and heard a commotion in the front of the apartment. Cooper heard someone yell, “Oh, my God, he stabbed him.” Tr. Vol. III p. 124. Cooper ran out of her apartment. Cooper saw Anderson leave her apartment and flee the scene. Cooper then called 911.

[4] Law enforcement arrived on the scene and found Williams dead, lying facedown in a pool of blood on the kitchen floor. A subsequent autopsy revealed that Williams died as the result of a stab wound to the chest, which pierced his lung, pericardial sac, and aorta. Law enforcement eventually found Anderson in Michigan, and he denied being in Indianapolis on the night of the stabbing. At a pretrial deposition, Bowens testified that he saw Anderson stab Williams.

[5] On May 14, 2021, the State charged Anderson with murder, a felony. A jury trial was held on February 27 and 28, 2024. Bowens’ deposition was admitted into evidence at trial. The jury found Anderson guilty as charged, and the trial court sentenced him to fifty-six years of incarceration. Anderson now appeals.

Discussion and Decision

[6] Anderson claims that the State failed to present evidence sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was the person who stabbed and killed Williams. “Claims of insufficient evidence ‘warrant a deferential standard, in which we neither reweigh the evidence nor judge witness credibility.’ ” Stubbers v. State, 190 N.E.3d 424, 429 (Ind. Ct. App. 2022) (quoting Powell v. State, 151 N.E.3d 256, 262 (Ind. 2020)), trans. denied. On appeal, “[w]e consider only the evidence supporting the judgment and any reasonable inferences drawn from that evidence.” Id. (citing Powell, 151 N.E.3d at 262). “ ‘We will affirm a conviction if there is substantial evidence of probative value that would lead a reasonable trier of fact to conclude that the defendant was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt,’ ” and we will affirm a conviction “ ‘unless no reasonable fact-finder could find the elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt.’ ” Id. (quoting Powell, 151 N.E.3d at 262). It is not necessary that the evidence overcome every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; instead, the evidence is sufficient if an inference may reasonably be drawn from it to support the verdict. Id. (citing Drane v. State, 867 N.E.2d 144, 146-47 (Ind. 2007)).

[7] To convict Anderson of murder, the State had to prove that he knowingly or intentionally killed Williams. Ind. Code § 35-42-1-1(1). Anderson does not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence showing that Williams was stabbed and killed. Anderson claims only that the State failed to prove that he was the person who stabbed and killed Williams. We disagree.

[8] Bowens testified that he saw Anderson stab Williams in the chest. The testimony of a single eyewitness can sustain a conviction for murder. Dixson v. State, 865 N.E.2d 704, 714 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (citing Green v. State, 756 N.E.2d 496, 497 (Ind. 2001)), trans. denied. Additionally, Cooper testified that Anderson was at Cooper's apartment on the night of the murder and that Anderson fled Cooper's apartment shortly after she heard someone yell, “Oh, my God, he stabbed him.” Tr. Vol. III p. 124. Anderson's flight from the scene is circumstantial evidence of his consciousness of guilt. Myers v. State, 27 N.E.3d 1069, 1077 (Ind. 2015) (citing Brown v. State, 563 N.E.2d 103, 107 (Ind. 1990)).

[9] Anderson argues that the murder weapon was not found and that no DNA connected him to the crime. Neither is required to prove the offense of murder. See Sallee v. State, 51 N.E.3d 130, 134 (Ind. 2016) (noting that DNA evidence is not required to sustain a murder conviction); McCurdy v. State, 263 Ind. 66, 72, 324 N.E.2d 489, 493 (1975) (“The state is not required to produce the murder weapon.”). Anderson's arguments regarding the lack of a weapon and DNA evidence are merely requests that we reweigh the evidence, which we cannot do. Stubbers, 190 N.E.3d at 429. Considering only the evidence favorable to the jury's verdict, we conclude that the State presented sufficient evidence to prove that Anderson was the person who stabbed and killed Williams.

Conclusion

[10] The State presented sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Anderson was the person who stabbed and killed Williams. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's judgment.

[11] Affirmed.

Tavitas, Judge.

May, J., and DeBoer, J., concur.