MIDDLETON v. STATE (2026)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

[1] Marchello L. Middleton (“Middleton”) was convicted after a jury trial of one count of Level 1 felony attempted murder,¹ one count of Level 5 felony domestic battery,² and three counts of Level 5 felony battery ³ and sentenced to an aggregate term of forty-four years executed in the Indiana Department of Correction. Middleton appeals and raises one issue for our review: whether the State presented sufficient evidence to support his conviction for attempted murder. We affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

[2] In December 2023, Middleton and Jaquana Middleton (“Jaquana”) had been married for twelve years and were still legally married but had been separated for about two years. At the time, Jaquana was in a relationship with Jeremiah Raspberry (“Raspberry”). On December 11, 2023, Raspberry drove Jaquana to her job at a Popeye's fast-food restaurant at approximately 2:00 p.m. As Jaquana walked toward the entrance of the restaurant, a white SUV driven by Middleton pulled into the parking lot and stopped in front of Raspberry's car. Middleton exited the SUV and immediately marched over to Raspberry's car. Jaquana walked back over to Raspberry's car, and Middleton confronted her. Middleton became aggressive and loudly called Jaquana a “bitch” and accused her of lying to and cheating on him. Tr. Vol. 2 p. 151. Raspberry exited his car and attempted to “diffuse [sic]” the situation, eventually using his body to separate Middleton and Jaquana. Id. at 151, 179. Middleton started yelling at Raspberry as well, accusing him of “fucking with [his] wife” and demanding to know why he was driving her to work. Id. at 179.

[3] Middleton continued his aggression and attempted to get to Jaquana as Raspberry tried to guide Middleton back to his SUV. Before reaching the SUV, Middleton stepped toward Jaquana, grabbed her by the face, and tackled her to the concrete sidewalk. Raspberry pushed Middleton off of Jaquana, and a physical fight ensued between the two men. After Raspberry pinned Middleton on the ground, the two separated, and Middleton returned to his feet. After the fight, several of Jaquana's co-workers escorted her into the restaurant, and they were standing in the interior of the entryway.

[4] Middleton then walked back to his SUV, sat in the driver's seat, and started the SUV. While Raspberry was still standing in the parking lot near the entrance to the restaurant, Middleton began driving his SUV, turned it toward Raspberry, and accelerated. State's Ex. 7 at 04:20–04:22. Middleton's SUV struck Raspberry in the waist, and Raspberry folded over the hood. Id. at 04:22. Middleton continued driving forward several more feet, ramming Raspberry into the brick wall and glass doors of the restaurant and pinning him there. Id. at 04:22–04:35. This caused glass in the entryway to break and pushed the glass paneled doors inward onto Jaquana and her coworkers in the entryway. After a few seconds, Middleton backed his SUV up and fled the scene.

[5] Police officers arrived shortly after Middleton fled and found Raspberry lying in the entryway among the broken glass doors. Raspberry was incoherent, and the doors were covered in his blood. Raspberry was covered in blood, and the officers observed that he was “going in and out of consciousness.” Tr. Vol. 2 p. 225. His arm was bleeding through a makeshift bandage, his head was injured, and his thumb was dislocated. Middleton's action of driving into the building also injured several Popeye's employees and damaged the building. The impact of the SUV hitting the building cracked bricks near the entrance, and the lobby was condemned due to structural damage. One of the cashiers suffered a dislocated shoulder when the glass doors collapsed on her, and another cashier was hit on the head and lost consciousness for several minutes. Another employee sustained significant bruising to her head, knee, and shoulder from the impact.

[6] Later that day, officers located Middleton in a wooded area behind a residential neighborhood and placed him under arrest. On December 14, 2023, the State brought charges against Middleton. Following several amendments to the charges, Middleton was brought to trial on four counts of Level 5 felony battery, Level 5 felony domestic battery, Level 6 felony battery, Level 6 felony criminal recklessness, and the Level 1 felony attempted murder of Raspberry. A jury trial was held, and at the conclusion, the jury found Middleton guilty of all charges. Ultimately, the trial court entered judgment of conviction for Level 1 felony attempted murder, Level 5 felony domestic battery, and three counts of Level 5 felony battery and sentenced Middleton to an aggregate term of forty-four years in the Indiana Department of Correction. Middleton now appeals.

Discussion and Decision

[7] Middleton argues that the State failed to present sufficient evidence to support his conviction for Level 1 felony attempted murder. When there is a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, “[w]e neither reweigh evidence nor judge witness credibility.” Gibson v. State, 51 N.E.3d 204, 210 (Ind. 2016), cert. denied. Instead, we consider only that evidence most favorable to the judgment together with all reasonable inferences drawn therefrom. Id. “We will affirm the judgment if it is supported by substantial evidence of probative value even if there is some conflict in that evidence.” Id. Further, “[w]e will affirm the conviction unless no reasonable fact-finder could find the elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt.” Love v. State, 73 N.E.3d 693, 696 (Ind. 2017).

[8] To convict Middleton of Level 1 felony attempted murder, the State was required to prove that acting with the specific intent to kill, he engaged in conduct that constituted a substantial step toward the killing of another person. See Ind. Code §§ 35-42-1-1(1), 35-41-5-1. Middleton only challenges whether sufficient evidence was presented to prove that he acted with the specific intent to kill Raspberry. “Intent to kill may be inferred from the nature of the attack and circumstances surrounding the crime.” Perez v. State, 872 N.E.2d 208, 214 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007), trans. denied. Intent to kill may also be inferred from “the intentional use of a deadly weapon in a manner likely to cause death or great bodily injury.” Schuler v. State, 112 N.E.3d 180, 188 (Ind. 2018). An automobile may be considered a “deadly weapon.” See DeWhitt v. State, 829 N.E.2d 1055, 1064 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (involving a circumstance where the defendant drove his vehicle through a gate and struck the victim's leg with his bumper); see also Solomon v. State, 570 N.E.2d 1293, 1295 (Ind. Ct. App. 1991) (involving a circumstance where the defendant put his car in reverse and accelerated it directly at the victim, who luckily avoided being hit by the defendant's car).

[9] Looking to the nature of Middleton's attack and the circumstances surrounding his crime, the evidence was sufficient to allow the jury to reasonably infer that Middleton acted with the specific intent to kill Raspberry. The evidence revealed that Middleton was upset about Raspberry's relationship with Jaquana, and he aggressively confronted both of them in the Popeye's parking lot. During this confrontation, Middleton physically attacked Jaquana, grabbing her face and tackling her to the ground, and Raspberry then came to her defense, resulting in a fight between Raspberry and Middleton. After this physical altercation ended with Raspberry pinning Middleton to the ground, Middleton returned to his SUV. Once in the SUV, Middleton started the engine, aimed the vehicle toward Raspberry, and accelerated into Raspberry. Middleton's SUV struck Raspberry in the waist with his SUV, and Middleton continued driving forward several more feet, ramming Raspberry into the brick wall and glass doors of the restaurant and pinning him there. After a few seconds, Middleton backed his SUV up and fled the scene.

[10] Based on this evidence, the jury could reasonably infer that Middleton intended to kill Raspberry when he purposely drove his SUV into Raspberry, especially in light of the fact that Middleton did not stop his SUV after striking Raspberry and, instead, continued to accelerate and forcefully pin Raspberry between the building and Middleton's SUV. Middleton struck the building with such force that the glass doors shattered and collapsed, the bricks on the side of the building cracked, and the lobby of the building had to be condemned from structural damage. Given the nature of Middleton's attack and his deliberate use of his SUV in a manner likely to cause great bodily injury or death to Raspberry, the jury reasonably inferred that Middleton acted with the specific intent to kill Raspberry. Middleton's arguments to the contrary are unpersuasive and are merely requests to reweigh the evidence, which we will not do. Gibson, 51 N.E.3d at 210. We, therefore, conclude that sufficient evidence was presented to support Middleton's conviction for attempted murder.

[11] Affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Ind. Code §§ 35-42-1-1(1), 35-41-5-1.

2.   I.C. § 35-42-2-1.3(a)(1), (c)(2).

3.   I.C. § 35-42-2-1(c)(1), (g)(2).

Foley, Judge.

May, J. and Altice, J., concur.