David D. Woods, Appellant-Defendant v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff (2025)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

[1] A jury found David Woods guilty of two counts of Level 2 felony dealing in a narcotic drug. Woods appeals, arguing that his convictions are not supported by sufficient evidence.

[2] We affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

[3] The Fort Wayne Police Department utilized a confidential informant (“CI”) to conduct two controlled drug buys. The CI purchased fentanyl from Woods on June 22 and July 11. During each controlled buy, the police officers followed standard protocols, i.e., the officers searched the CI and his vehicle, fitted him with a video/audio camera, provided the buy money, and photocopied the buy money so that they could match the money after making an arrest. Several officers also conducted surveillance of the controlled drug buys.

[4] On June 22, the CI arranged to meet Woods at his house. The CI gave Woods $860 in buy money, and Woods gave the CI 200 fentanyl pills.

[5] The July 11 controlled buy was again conducted at Woods's home. Like the June 22 controlled buy, the CI gave Woods the buy money, and Woods gave the CI 200 fentanyl pills.

[6] Law enforcement officers confirmed that the phone number the CI had for Woods belonged to Woods. Phone records established contact between the CI's phone number and Woods's phone number on June 22 and July 11.

[7] Approximately two weeks later, law enforcement searched Woods's home. During the search, the officers found a handgun in the couch cushions where Woods had been sitting when they entered the home. After the officers found a cell phone, they called the number the CI had provided for Woods, and the cell phone rang. The officers also found two electronic scales in the home. However, they did not find any illegal substances or any of the buy money that the CI had used to purchase fentanyl.

[8] The State charged Woods with three counts of Level 2 felony dealing in cocaine or narcotic drug, one count of Level 4 felony possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon, and one count of Level 6 felony maintaining a common nuisance. Before trial, the trial court granted the State's motion to dismiss the maintaining a common nuisance charge.

[9] Woods's first jury trial commenced on October 17, 2023. The jury found him guilty of possession of a firearm by a serious violent felon but could not reach a verdict on the three counts of Level 2 felony dealing in a narcotic drug. Woods was retried on the Level 2 felony dealing charges on July 2 and 3, 2024. That jury found Woods guilty of Counts I and III, the counts charging the controlled buys that occurred at Woods's home on June 22 and July 11.¹ Thereafter, the trial court ordered Woods to serve an aggregate twenty-five-year sentence in the Department of Correction.

[10] Woods now appeals.²

Discussion and Decision

[11] Woods challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his Level 2 felony dealing in narcotic convictions. For challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence, we consider only the probative evidence and the reasonable inferences therefrom that support the judgment of the trier of fact. Hall v. State, 177 N.E.3d 1183, 1191 (Ind. 2021). We will neither reweigh the evidence nor judge witness credibility. Id. We will affirm a conviction unless no reasonable fact-finder could find the elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Id.

[12] Relying in part on the fact that the search of his residence did not result in any drugs or money connecting him to the controlled buys, Woods argues that the CI's testimony that Woods sold him fentanyl was not credible. Woods also directs our attention to the benefit the CI received, i.e., the State's agreement that it would not prosecute the CI for two felonies and would dismiss a misdemeanor possession case in exchange for him agreeing to participate in the controlled buys. See Tr. Vol. 3, pp. 161, 163-64.

[13] The jury heard evidence about the benefit the CI received for his participation in the controlled buys and counsels’ arguments concerning the CI's credibility. It was within the province of the jury to judge the CI's credibility concerning the controlled buys that occurred at Woods's home. The CI described the controlled buys and we will not reweigh the evidence or the CI's credibility on appeal.

[14] The State therefore presented sufficient evidence to prove that Woods committed dealing in cocaine or narcotic drug as alleged in Counts I and III. We affirm Woods's Level 2 felony dealing convictions.

[15] Affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

1.   The jury found Woods not guilty of the first alleged controlled buy that occurred on June 16, 2023, which was charged in Count II. That alleged buy occurred at a Shell gas station. When Woods arrived at the gas station, law enforcement officers observed the CI enter Woods's vehicle. Two other individuals were present in the vehicle at the time. The CI testified that he gave Woods $800 and Woods, who in turn gave the CI 200 fentanyl pills.

2.   Woods does not challenge the possession of a firearm conviction.

Mathias, Judge.

Judges Foley and Felix concur. Foley, J., and Felix, J., concur.