SLATES v. STATE (2025)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

[1] Chad Duncan Slates appeals his conviction for Level 5 felony burglary. Slates raises a single issue for our review, namely, whether the State presented sufficient evidence to support his conviction. We affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

[2] In the early morning hours of February 4, 2023, Slates and Michael Paul Johnson entered an abandoned factory in Granger to steal copper wire from inside the factory. Inside, they split up, and Slates went toward a back area and began “cutting wire.” Tr. Vol. 1, p. 148. Soon thereafter, Steve Livingston arrived in a white van, owned by Slates, so Slates and Johnson could put their stolen wire inside the van and drive away.

[3] However, about thirty or forty minutes into their endeavor, St. Joseph County Police Department Officer Anthony Bradburn arrived on the scene and parked next to Slates's van. Johnson was nearest to Officer Bradburn and was immediately apprehended, but Slates “took off” and was “gone.” Id. at 149. After other officers arrived to assist Officer Bradburn, they located Livingston nearby; Livingston had “a very severe limp” and was not “that agile.” Id. at 61-62.

[4] Officers confirmed that the white van was registered to Slates, and they obtained a search warrant for Slates's van. Inside, they located two cell phones, one belonging to Slates and one belonging to Livingston. They also located mail addressed to Slates. And the van appeared to be a van an independent contractor electrician might use; Slates is an electrician. Officers apprehended Slates some time later.

[5] The State charged Slates with Level 5 felony burglary. At his ensuing jury trial, Johnson testified against Slates in accordance with the terms of a plea agreement Johnson had reached on his own charges. Officer Bradburn also testified, and the State admitted evidence showing that Slates's van and cell phone were at the factory at the time of the incident. In his defense, Slates presented the testimony of a witness who asserted that Slates was with him on the day in question. The jury found Slates guilty, and the trial court entered its judgment of conviction and sentenced Slates accordingly.

[6] This appeal ensued.

Discussion and Decision

[7] On appeal, Slates contends that the State failed to present sufficient evidence to show that he was at the factory during the February 4 theft. 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.

[8] The State presented sufficient evidence to demonstrate that Slates was inside the factory stealing copper wire on the day in question. Johnson testified to as much, and Officer Bradburn corroborated Johnson's description of where Slates was inside the factory when Officer Bradburn arrived on the scene as well as Slates fleeing the scene. Officers also located Slates's van and cell phone at the scene.

[9] Slates's only argument on appeal is that the State's evidence was not worthy of credit and that the jury should have credited his alibi witness instead. Slates's argument is simply an invitation for this Court to reweigh the evidence that was before the jury, which we will not do. We affirm Slates's conviction.

[10] Affirmed.

Mathias, Judge.

May, J., and Bradford, J., concur.