GALLOWAY v. STATE (2026)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

[1] Following a jury trial, Justin Galloway (“Galloway”) was convicted of Class A misdemeanor battery causing bodily injury.¹ Galloway appeals, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction. We affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

[2] In September 2023, Galloway and B.R. became acquainted on Facebook. They arranged to meet and go on a date in Pulaski County on September 19, 2023. That evening, Galloway picked B.R. up from her mother's home around seven o'clock and drove B.R. to a nearby park. The two walked around holding hands. At one point, Galloway tried to kiss B.R., who rejected his advance. In response, Galloway bit B.R. on the neck. B.R. decided to give Galloway another chance, and Galloway's behavior improved. The two continued walking and eventually exchanged a consensual kiss. Later, they picked up food from Dairy Queen and drove back to the park, where they ate in Galloway's vehicle.

[3] When B.R. finished her food, Galloway touched her breasts, touched her thighs, and tried to move his hand up her thigh. B.R. was “kind of stunned” and initially froze. Tr. Vol. 2 p. 79. She then pushed Galloway's hand away and told him no. In response, Galloway bit both sides of her neck, bit her shoulder several times, and bit her stomach. These bites hurt B.R. and left bruises. B.R. continued to “fight[ ] off” Galloway's sexual advances. Id. at 82. “[H]e kept getting more and more irritated, the more [she] fought him off[.]” Id. at 106. When Galloway tried to remove B.R.’s shirt, B.R. tried to keep her arms close to her body, telling Galloway to “stop ․ get off, like I don't want to do this, please get off of me.” Id. at 82. Galloway then tried to “dry hump” her. Id. at 83. Galloway also tried to undo B.R.’s belt and pull down her pants. At this point, B.R. kept saying, “I want to go home, I want to go home,” but Galloway “wasn't listening.” Id. Galloway finally stopped and drove B.R. home in silence around 10:30 p.m., after B.R. indicated that her family was probably worried because they had not heard from her in a couple of hours. When B.R. got home, she went straight to the bathroom without speaking to her mother. B.R.’s mother followed her into the bathroom, suspecting something was wrong. At that point, B.R.’s mother saw bite marks on B.R. “with full teeth imprints.” Id. at 129. B.R.’s mother called the police.

[4] On September 26, 2023, the State charged Galloway with Class A misdemeanor battery causing bodily injury. A jury trial was held where B.R. testified about the events of September 19, 2023. Galloway also testified, as did B.R.’s mother and a responding police officer. The jury found Galloway guilty. The trial court later imposed a one-year sentence, ordering six months executed with the balance suspended to supervised probation. Galloway now appeals.

Discussion and Decision

[5] Galloway challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction. In reviewing this type of challenge, “we neither reweigh the evidence nor judge the credibility of witnesses.” Cole v. State, 69 N.E.3d 552, 556 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017), trans. denied. Rather, “we consider only the evidence supporting the conviction and the reasonable inferences flowing therefrom.” Id. 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 fact-finder could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Konkle v. State, 253 N.E.3d 1068, 1090 (Ind. 2025). Furthermore, “[a] conviction may be supported by the uncorroborated testimony of one witness or by circumstantial evidence alone.” McCarthy v. State, 749 N.E.2d 528, 538 (Ind. 2001).

[6] Here, Galloway was convicted of Class A misdemeanor battery causing bodily injury. A person commits this offense if he “knowingly or intentionally ․ touches another person in a rude, insolent, or angry manner” and the touching “results in bodily injury to any other person[.]” Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1(c)(1), (d)(1). A person acts knowingly if “he is aware of a high probability that he is doing so.” I.C. § 35-41-2-2(b). A person acts intentionally if “it is his conscious objective to do so.” I.C. § 35-41-2-2(a). A touching that is rude, insolent, or angry includes a touching that is discourteous, offensive, or impudent. In re Hill, 144 N.E.3d 184, 188 (Ind. 2020). Moreover, bodily injury is defined as “any impairment of physical condition, including physical pain.” I.C. § 35-31.5-2-29.

[7] Galloway concedes “the State presented sufficient evidence to prove touching and bodily injury.” Appellant's Br. p. 8. Galloway also concedes that his touching of B.R. “was nonconsensual[.]” Id. at 9. However, Galloway claims there was insufficient evidence he touched B.R. in a rude, insolent, or angry manner because “the touching was only sexual in nature,” id. at 4, he had “expressed a desire for the relationship to continue past th[e] first meeting,” and the two of them shared a consensual kiss, id. at 9. At one point, Galloway focuses on the term insolent, directing us to a dictionary definition defining the term as proud, disdainful, haughty, arrogant, overbearing; offensively contemptuous of the rights or feelings of others. See id. at 8. He claims “[t]here was no evidence that [he] knowingly touched B.R. in an insolent manner” and “[n]ot every nonconsensual touching rises to the level of battery.” Id.

[8] We reject Galloway's implicit requests to reweigh the evidence or to exclusively focus on the term “insolent,” rather than on whether the evidence established a rude, angry, or insolent touching, which includes a touching that is discourteous, offensive, or impudent. See In re Hill, 144 N.E.3d at 188. Here, B.R. testified Galloway groped her and continued to do so after she pushed his hand away and said no. In response, Galloway bit her neck, shoulders, and stomach, causing pain and leaving bruises. He then tried to remove B.R.’s shirt while B.R. told him to stop and get off of her. Galloway continued to grope B.R. and “wasn't listening” when she kept saying, “I want to go home, I want to go home[.]” Tr. Vol. 2 p. 83. He stopped touching B.R. only after she suggested her family would be worried.

[9] This was sufficient evidence for a fact-finder to determine, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Galloway knowingly or intentionally touched B.R. in a rude, angry, or insolent manner, resulting in bodily injury. We, therefore, conclude that the State presented sufficient evidence to support Galloway's conviction for Class A misdemeanor battery causing bodily injury.

[10] Affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1(c)(1), (d)(1).

Foley, Judge.

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