Kayla Nicole Phillips, Appellant-Defendant v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff (2026)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

[1] Kayla Nicole Phillips (“Phillips”) was convicted after a jury trial of Level 6 felony residential entry ¹ and Level 6 felony domestic battery.² Phillips appeals, arguing that the State failed to present sufficient evidence to support her conviction for Level 6 felony residential entry. Phillips's sole contention on appeal is that she lived in the residence that she was alleged to have broken into, and therefore, the State failed to present sufficient evidence to support the conviction of residential entry. Identifying sufficient evidence, we affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

[2] Phillips and Trenton Owens (“Owens”) have three children together, and as of December 2021, these children were all under the age of five. Phillips and Owens appear to have had a tumultuous relationship that spanned two separate criminal cases and a protective order. In September 2021, Owens was charged with burglary for breaking into Phillips's residence on 14th Street in Richmond. Owens was eventually convicted of burglary and sentenced to nine years in prison for the burglary and 18 months in prison for violating his probation in another matter. See Tr. Vol. II p. 65. The court also issued a protective order prohibiting Owens from having contact with Phillips.

[3] In November 2021, Owens signed a lease for a residence on Mid Drive in Richmond, listing himself and his two children as occupants. See State's Ex. Vol. I pp. 3–4. Owens placed all utility and other services for the Mid Drive residence in his name and retained the keys to the residence. Owens paid the rent for the Mid Drive residence and never provided Phillips a key.

[4] On December 14, 2021, Owens was at the Mid Drive residence with two of his children when Phillips arrived and was “yelling and beating on the door.” Tr. Vol. II p. 72. The door to the residence was locked, and the deadbolt was engaged. Owens did not want Phillips in the home. Phillips broke down the door, entered the residence, and began to hit and yell at Owens, demanding that he return her cell phone. Owens called law enforcement and reported the incident, but Phillips fled the residence before they arrived.

[5] On January 5, 2022, the State charged Phillips with Level 6 felony residential entry and Level 6 felony domestic battery. A jury trial was held on December 16, 2025, and December 17, 2025.

[6] Prior to the trial, Owens discussed his testimony in the present case and his burglary sentence with the prosecutor. The State offered to reduce Owens's conviction in the burglary case to the lesser-included offense of residential entry and modify his sentence to a term of one year imprisonment in exchange for Owens providing truthful testimony in Phillips's case. The prosecutor characterized the offer as treating both Owens and Phillips similar (each facing Level 6 residential entry offenses) for similar conduct. See State's Ex. Vol. I pp. 5–6.

[7] Phillips's friend, Judyonna Lopez (“Lopez”), testified on her behalf. Lopez explained that in December 2021 she would spend time with Phillips at the Mid Drive residence, which she characterized as Phillips's home. See Tr. Vol. II p. 128. According to Lopez, Phillips moved into the Mid Drive residence in April 2021.

[8] Phillips also took the stand herself, in her own defense, claiming that she lived with Owens at the Mid Drive residence. Phillips acknowledged that she was not on the lease but explained that she was not on the lease because of the protective order issued against Owens. She also stated that she had lived with Owens at many different addresses in the past and only had her name on one of the leases. Phillips claimed she moved into the Mid Drive residence after Thanksgiving 2021 and purchased various appliances for the home. She further stated that her furniture and clothing were present in the home, identifying a Victoria Secret blanket as hers in a video exhibit. See State's Exhibit 4b “Burglary” 00:19–00:27.

[9] At the conclusion of the trial, the jury returned guilty verdicts on both counts. The trial court entered judgment of conviction as to both counts and on January 12, 2026, sentenced Phillips to an aggregate sentence of 547 days executed in the Indiana Department of Correction. Phillips now appeals.

Discussion and Decision

[10] Phillips challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting her conviction for Level 6 felony residential entry only, arguing that the State failed to prove that she broke into a residence that was not her own. “Sufficiency-of-the-evidence claims trigger a deferential standard of review[.]” Hancz-Barron v. State, 235 N.E.3d 1237, 1244 (Ind. 2024). “When reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of evidence supporting a conviction, we neither reweigh the evidence nor assess the credibility of witnesses.” Fix v. State, 186 N.E.3d 1134, 1138 (Ind. 2022) (citing Jackson v. State, 50 N.E.3d 767, 770 (Ind. 2016)). “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.’ ” Hancz-Barron, 235 N.E.3d at 1244 (quoting Willis v. State, 27 N.E.3d 1065, 1066 (Ind. 2015)). When conducting this review, “we consider only the evidence that supports the jury's determination, not evidence that might undermine it.” Id. (citing Teising v. State, 226 N.E.3d 780, 783 (Ind. 2024)).

[11] Indiana Code section 35-43-2-1.5 provides that: “A person who knowingly or intentionally breaks and enters the dwelling of another person commits residential entry, a Level 6 felony.” Ind. Code § 35-43-2-1.5. A “dwelling” is defined as “a building, structure, or other enclosed space, permanent or temporary, movable or fixed, that is a person's home or place of lodging.” I.C. § 35-31.5-2-107.

[12] Phillips's sole contention on appeal is that she resided with Owens at the Mid Drive residence and therefore could not have entered the dwelling of another person. See Appellant's Br. p. 9. Phillips argues that due to Owens's motivation to be untruthful based upon the deal offered by State to reduce his burglary conviction and sentence and avoid potential prosecution for violating the terms of the protective order, his testimony should be disregarded, leaving only evidence that supports her contention that she lived at the Mid Drive residence. Despite the packaging, Phillips's argument remains merely a request to reweigh the evidence, which we cannot do. See Hall v. State, 177 N.E.3d 1183, 1191–92 n.6 (Ind. 2021) (explaining “the jury heard and viewed live testimony from [other co-defendants] and apparently believed them, based on the verdict.”).

[13] The facts most favorable to the verdict reflect that, in November 2021, Owens leased the Mid Drive residence with two of his children. Once he moved into the residence, he was provided with two keys, which stayed in his possession. Further, the electric, sanitation, and internet services were all solely in his name and only he paid the rent. See Tr. Vol. II p. 61. On the evening of December 14, 2021, Phillips came to Owens's home, demanded entry, and once denied entry, broke down the door and entered the residence. Therefore, we conclude that the State presented sufficient evidence to support the conviction of residential entry.

[14] Affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Ind. Code § 35-43-2-1.5.

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

Foley, Judge.

Vaidik, J., and Altice, J., concur.