Adrian Bond, Appellant-Defendant v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff (2026)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Case Summary

[1] Adrian Bond appeals his conviction for Level 2 felony robbery resulting in serious bodily injury, arguing that the evidence is insufficient to support it. Finding the evidence sufficient, we affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

[2] Elijah Martin was known for selling guns. From February to early July 2023, Jeremiah Shanks dated Martin's sister. On July 12, Shanks, Bond, and Nate Brown were at Shanks's uncle's apartment at Brownstone Apartments in Indianapolis. Shanks and Martin made plans for Martin to come to Brownstone and sell a gun to Shanks. Shanks asked Bond to accompany him to meet Martin for protection. Shanks brought a gun, and Bond brought a gun and a pink fuzzy mask that belonged to Brown. Shortly after noon, Shanks and Bond (with the pink mask in his hand) met Martin in the courtyard. Martin had two guns. The three then entered a stairwell for one of the buildings. Inside the stairwell, Shanks shot Martin in the chest, and he later died. Bond then put on the mask, grabbed one of Martin's guns that had fallen out of his pocket onto the floor, and exited the building through a different door along with Shanks. Bond tried to re-enter the building to get Martin's cell phone, but the door was locked. Bond met up with Brown in a nearby alley and gave him Martin's gun and the pink mask.

[3] Approximately 40 minutes after the shooting, Bond appeared in a video on Brown's Instagram account with Shanks and Brown. The three were dancing to music and waving guns. See Ex. 90. When Brown later listed Martin's gun for sale online, Bond messaged him and asked him why he did so “damner da next day.” Ex. 82. Brown replied that it was because that was the “gun [he] had planned on takin.” Id. Bond complained, “Yo ass ain go on no hits bro,” and asked “how tf you want sum you ain tryna put no work in.” Ex. 98. Bond also said, “y'all said I was gon get 2 mo heats.”¹ Ex. 82.

[4] The State charged Bond with murder, Level 2 felony robbery resulting in serious bodily injury, and Level 3 felony armed robbery, and a jury trial was held in May 2025.² Bond testified in his own defense. He claimed that he didn't know a robbery was going to occur. He acknowledged that after the shooting, he put on the pink mask, picked up one of Martin's guns from the floor, and tried to re-enter the apartment building to get Martin's cell phone. But he claimed that he only did these things because he was “afraid” of Shanks. Tr. Vol. 4 p. 197. The jury found Bond not guilty of murder but guilty of both robbery counts. The trial court entered judgment of conviction for Level 2 felony robbery resulting in serious bodily injury and sentenced him to 23 years.

[5] Bond now appeals.³

Discussion and Decision

[6] Bond contends that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction for robbery. When reviewing sufficiency-of-the-evidence claims, we neither reweigh the evidence nor judge the credibility of witnesses. Willis v. State, 27 N.E.3d 1065, 1066 (Ind. 2015). We will consider only the evidence supporting the conviction and any reasonable inferences that can be drawn from the evidence. Id. A conviction will be affirmed if there is substantial evidence of probative value to support each element of the offense such that a reasonable trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Id.

[7] To convict Bond of Level 2 felony robbery resulting in serious bodily injury as charged here, the State had to prove that he knowingly or intentionally took property from Martin or from the presence of Martin by using or threatening the use of force, i.e., shooting at Martin, and that those acts resulted in a serious bodily injury to Martin. See Ind. Code § 35-42-5-1(a); Appellant's App. Vol. 2 p. 17. There is no distinction between the responsibility of a principal and an accomplice. Hall v. State, 177 N.E.3d 1183, 1191 (Ind. 2021). “Accordingly, an accomplice commits the actual offense when a person knowingly or intentionally aids, induces, or causes another person to commit an offense.” Id.; I.C. § 35-41-2-4. An accomplice is “criminally responsible for all acts committed by a confederate which are a probable and natural consequence of their concerted action.” Forney v. State, 742 N.E.2d 934, 938 (Ind. 2001) (quotation omitted). “A jury may infer complicity and participation in a crime from [the] defendant's failure to oppose the crime, companionship with the one engaged therein, and a course of conduct before, during, and after the offense which tends to show complicity.” Hauk v. State, 729 N.E.2d 994, 998 (Ind. 2000) (quotation omitted).

[8] Bond argues that his actions before, during, and after the crime do not establish accomplice liability for robbery. He asserts that he didn't know a robbery was going to occur and that his involvement was “limited to being at the scene and doing what Shanks, who was armed and who had just shot someone, ordered him to do.” Appellant's Br. p. 15. He also claims that he “cut ties” with Shanks after the shooting. Id. at 17. But as the State responds, these are merely requests for us to reweigh the evidence. The jury heard evidence that Bond brought a gun and Brown's pink mask when he and Shanks met Martin in the courtyard. After the shooting, Bond put on the mask, grabbed Martin's gun, and tried to re-enter the building to get Martin's phone. He met Brown in an alley and gave him Martin's gun and the pink mask. Approximately 40 minutes after the shooting, Bond, Shanks, and Brown appeared in an Instagram video dancing and waving guns. Furthermore, when Brown later listed Martin's gun for sale online, Bond was upset that he didn't get the gun. The jury could reasonably infer from this evidence that Bond participated in the scheme to rob Martin. The evidence is therefore sufficient to support Bond's conviction for Level 2 felony robbery resulting in serious bodily injury.

[9] Affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

1.   “Heat” is slang for gun. Tr. Vol. 4 p. 205.

2.   The State charged Shanks with murder and other offenses, and he was tried with Bond. The jury found Shanks guilty of murder and the other offenses, and the trial court sentenced him to 62 years. Shanks's appeal is pending. See Case No. 25A-CR-1539.

3.   On March 24, 2026, we ordered the court reporter to file a new Exhibit 9 within seven days because the CD containing the exhibit was broken and unplayable. The court reporter has yet to do so. However, we were able to view Exhibit 9 from Shanks's appeal.

Vaidik, Judge.

Mathias, J., and Pyle, J., concur.