Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
T.A.G., Appellant-Defendant, v. STATE OF INDIANA, Appellee-Plaintiff.
MEMORANDUM DECISION
T.A.G. appeals from his bench conviction of delivery of a controlled substance: phencyclidine. He was sentenced to the Indiana Department of Correction for a determinate period of five years. He alleges that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction. We affirm.
On appeal this Court will not weigh evidence or question the credibility of witnesses. Walker v. State (1973), 155 Ind.App. 404, 293 N.E.2d 35. We will consider only that evidence most favorable to the State with all reasonable inferences which may be drawn therefrom. The conviction will be affirmed if, from that point of view, there is substantial evidence of probative value from which the trier of fact could reasonably infer that the defendant was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Coffelt v. State (1974), 159 Ind.App. 485, 307 N.E.2d 497.
Two police officers and three other individuals testified regarding a meeting which took place before the drug buy. At the meeting, T.G. took charge. He did indicate that he did not want to be present when the transaction actually took place “in case anything went wrong.” The three other individuals who testified were also arrested. Two testified that T.G. was the boss, and the other individual stated that he did not know if T.G. was the one controlling the sale. The officers witnessed one of the individuals, a woman, leave the apartment on the date of the sale, go to a neighboring apartment house, and return within ten minutes with the drug. T.G. was arrested in the same neighboring apartment house the same evening. An agency relationship was established. See IC 1971, 35-24.1-4.1-2(a)(1) and 35-24.1-1-1(g) (Burns Code Ed.).
Any leniency motive on the part of those defendants who implicated T.G. went to the question of credibility. We shall not reassess the trial court's determination of that factor. Shank v. State (1972), 154 Ind.App. 147, 289 N.E.2d 315. Evidence sufficient to support the conviction was adduced.
We affirm.
STATON, J.
GARRARD, P.J. and HOFFMAN, J., Concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: No. 3-178 A 1
Decided: September 28, 1978
Court: Court of Appeals of Indiana.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)