Cade Christopher Kirk, Appellant-Defendant v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff (2025)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Statement of the Case

[1] Cade Kirk (“Kirk”) appeals his conviction, following a jury trial, for murder.¹ He argues that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction. Concluding that there is sufficient evidence to support Kirk's conviction, we affirm the trial court's judgment.

[2] We affirm.

Issue

Whether there is sufficient evidence to support Kirk's conviction.

Facts

[3] The facts most favorable to the judgment reveal that at approximately 10:20 p.m. on June 22, 2024, thirty-three-year-old Kirk, his girlfriend (“the girlfriend”), the girlfriend's aunt (“the aunt”), and the aunt's husband, Charles Miles (“Miles”), stopped at a Sunoco gas station (“the gas station”) in Evansville. The girlfriend went into the gas station's convenience store to purchase cigarettes. While waiting in Kirk's car, an intoxicated Miles saw Corey Fisher (“Fisher”) walk into the convenience store. Fisher had dated the aunt before Miles had married her. When Miles saw Fisher, Miles stumbled out of the back seat of Kirk's car and began shouting. As soon as Fisher exited the convenience store, Miles charged at Fisher and attempted to punch him. Fisher stepped back, and Miles fell on the ground. Fisher ran from Miles, who initially chased Fisher but then returned to Kirk's car. The gas station's surveillance camera recorded these events (“the gas station's recording”).

[4] As Fisher was walking to his nearby home, he noticed Kirk slowly drive past him. Fisher picked up a piece of asphalt that was located on the street and continued walking towards his home. Kirk turned his car onto a nearby side street, and when Fisher reached the side street, Kirk and Miles jumped out of Kirk's car and ran towards Fisher.

[5] Miles swung a punch at Fisher, and Fisher hit Miles in the head with the piece of asphalt. Fisher fell to the ground, and Kirk immediately began repeatedly punching Fisher in the back of the head. Fisher briefly stood up and then fell back down. While Fisher was on the ground, Kirk held him down as Miles punched him in the head and face. Kirk also continued to punch Fisher, who was no longer resisting. When Kirk and Miles noticed that a car had stopped, Miles kicked Fisher before he and Kirk ran to Kirk's car. A homeowner's (“the homeowner”) surveillance camera recorded these events (“the homeowner's recording”), which lasted less than thirty seconds. (State's Ex. 6, 1:54-2:20).

[6] Fisher stumbled to the homeowner's front porch and pounded on the front door. While the homeowner called 911, Fisher fell to his knees, sat down for a few seconds, and then fell over. These events were also included in the homeowner's recording. When first responders arrived at the scene, the homeowner believed that Fisher had “already passed away.” (Tr. Vol. 2 at 43). The first responders transported Fisher to the hospital, where he was placed on life support.

[7] Law enforcement officers obtained the homeowner's recording and the gas station's recording, which showed Kirk's vehicle's license plate number. After finding Kirk's vehicle at the girlfriend's house the following morning, law enforcement officers brought Kirk and Miles to the police station for questioning.

[8] Evansville Police Department Detective Steven Toney (“Detective Toney”) interviewed Kirk, who initially told Detective Toney several times that he had not participated in the fight between Miles and Fisher. When Detective Toney showed Kirk the homeowner's recording, Kirk told Detective Toney that he had only participated in the fight to defend Miles. Kirk's interview with Detective Toney was recorded (“the recording of Kirk's police interview”).

[9] Fisher died in the hospital two days later. His cause of death was blunt force head trauma, which had ultimately caused Fisher's “heart and lungs to stop.” (Tr. Vol. 2 at 122). According to the forensic pathologist who had performed Fisher's autopsy, the blunt force could have been inflicted by a fist.

[10] On June 25, 2024, the State charged Kirk with murder. At Kirk's March 2025 trial, during the State's opening statement, the State told the jurors that after they had heard all the evidence, they would be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that “Kirk [was] guilty of murder by knowingly killing ․ Fisher.” (Tr. Vol. 2 at 33).

[11] Also, during the trial, the jury heard the facts as set forth above. In addition, Detective Toney testified that he had watched the homeowner's recording at least forty to fifty times. Detective Toney also testified that he had watched the homeowner's recording in slow motion and had determined that Kirk had punched Fisher at least sixteen times and that Miles had punched Fisher at least twenty-six times. According to Detective Toney, “pretty much all of [the punches] were to [Fisher's] head or [Fisher's] face[.]” (Tr. Vol. 2 at 150).

[12] In addition to hearing the witnesses’ testimony, the jury watched the gas station's recording, the homeowner's recording, and the recording of Kirk's police interview. During closing argument, the State argued, in relevant part, as follows:

Cade Kirk went there because his friend had wanted to attack Corey Fisher. He went along with that attack and as you saw in the video he's holding Corey Fisher while Charles Miles is bam, bam, bam, over and over, over ten times, repeatedly in the head. He himself is responsible for not only over a dozen blows to the head of Corey Fisher, he's responsible for helping Charles Miles facilitate the other dozen blows to the head, over and over and over and over and over, at what point when you have so many blows do you understand that you are facilitating and enabling and participating in the process of killing a human being.

(Tr. Vol. 2 at 222).

[13] Further, the trial court instructed the jury on the lesser included offenses of Level 5 felony involuntary manslaughter, Level 5 felony battery, and Level 6 felony battery. The trial court also instructed the jury on defense of another person.

[14] The jury convicted Kirk of murder. The trial court sentenced him to fifty-five (55) years in the Department of Correction.

[15] Kirk now appeals.

Decision

[16] Kirk argues that there is insufficient evidence to support his conviction. We disagree.

[17] “Our standard for reviewing evidentiary sufficiency challenges is well established, as we have made clear that it is the fact-finder's role, not that of appellate courts, to assess witness credibility and weigh the evidence to determine whether it is sufficient to support a conviction.” Konkle v. State, 253 N.E.3d 1068, 1090 (Ind. 2025) (cleaned up). “A conviction is supported by sufficient evidence if there is substantial evidence of probative value supporting each element of the offense such that a reasonable trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id. (cleaned up). We review only the evidence most favorable to the verdict and the reasonable inferences therefrom and will reverse “only where it is shown that no reasonable fact-finder could find the elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id. at 1090-91 (cleaned up).

[18] To convict Kirk of murder, the State had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Kirk knowingly or intentionally killed Fisher. See I.C. § 35-42-1-1; (App. Vol. 2 at 12). Kirk “concedes Fisher died from injuries sustained in a fight involving Kirk[.]” (Kirk's Br. 7). However, “he disputes that he knowingly caused Fisher's death.” (Kirk's Br. 7). In other words, according to Kirk, “[t]he State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that [he] knowingly killed Fisher.”² (Kirk's Br. 9).

[19] “A person knowingly kills when [he is] ‘aware of a high probability’ that [his] actions may kill.” Leonard v. State, 80 N.E.3d 878, 882 (Ind. 2017) (quoting IND. CODE § 35-41-2-2(b)). “Knowledge and intent are both mental states and, absent an admission by the defendant, the jury must resort to the reasonable inferences from both the direct and circumstantial evidence to determine whether the defendant has the requisite knowledge or intent to commit the offense in question.” Pritcher v. State, 208 N.E.3d 656, 665-66 (Ind. Ct. App. 2023) (cleaned up); see also Leonard, 80 N.E.3d at 883 (explaining that “[b]ecause knowledge is the mental state of the actor, the trier of fact must resort to reasonable inferences of its existence.”).

[20] In determining whether a defendant was aware of the high probability that his actions would result in the death of a victim, the jury may consider the nature of the attack and the circumstances surrounding the crime. Burns v. State, 59 N.E.3d 323, 328 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016) (explaining that intent may be inferred from the nature of the attack and the circumstances surrounding the crime), trans. denied. In addition, the jury may consider the duration and brutality of a defendant's actions, and the relative strengths and sizes of a defendant and a victim. Pritcher, 208 N.E.3d at 666. This Court has further explained that “where blows of magnitude are repeated, a jury could conclude that the defendant had an intent to kill.” Burns, 59 N.E.3d at 328 (cleaned up).

[21] Here, our review of the evidence reveals that, in an unprovoked two-on-one attack that lasted less than thirty seconds, Kirk punched Fisher at least sixteen times in the head. In addition, Kirk held Fisher while Miles inflicted additional blows to Fisher's head and face. In sum, Fisher received at least forty-two blows, most of them to the head, in less than thirty seconds. Based on these facts and circumstances, the State presented sufficient evidence from which the jury could have reasonably concluded that Kirk was aware of a high probability that his actions of beating Fisher might kill Fisher. See Pritcher, 208 N.E.3d at 667 (explaining that based on the facts and circumstances of the case, sufficient evidence was presented from which the jury could have reasonably concluded that the defendant was aware of a high probability that his actions of beating the victim might kill the victim).

[22] In short, after weighing this evidence, judging the credibility of the witnesses, and watching the homeowner's surveillance video of Kirk beating Fisher, the jury determined beyond a reasonable doubt that Kirk had knowingly killed Fisher. We will not reweigh the evidence or judge the credibility of the witnesses. See Konkle, 253 N.E.3d at 1090. There is sufficient evidence to support Kirk's murder conviction.

[23] Affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

1.   IND. CODE § 35-42-1-1.

2.   Kirk contends that “[t]he State's theory that Kirk knowingly killed Fisher during the fistfight relied on Kirk's alleged use of brass knuckles.” (Kirk's Br. 7) (Emphasis added). However, our review of the evidence reveals that the State's theory of the case did not rely on Kirk's alleged use of brass knuckles. Although the State presented evidence that Kirk regularly carried brass knuckles, that brass knuckles had been found in Kirk's pants’ pocket, and that at one point in the homeowner's recording, it appeared that Kirk was lifting his shirt to possibly remove brass knuckles from his pocket, the State also presented evidence that Fisher's DNA had not been found on Kirk's brass knuckles. We further note that during the State's closing argument, the State specifically stated that it did not “think it matter[ed] whether [Kirk had] used brass knuckles or not[.]” (Tr. Vol. 2 at 237).

Pyle, Judge.

Chief Judge Altice and Judge DeBoer concur. Altice, C.J., and DeBoer, J., concur.