Quintin A. Kennedy, Appellant-Defendant v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff (2026)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Statement of the Case

[1] After a jury had convicted Quintin Kennedy (“Kennedy”) of Level 2 felony conspiracy to commit burglary,¹ Level 5 felony aiding, inducing, or causing domestic battery,² Level 6 felony criminal recklessness,³ and Level 6 felony killing a domestic animal,⁴ the trial court sentenced him to an aggregate sentence of twenty-one and one-half (211/212) years. On appeal, Kennedy argues that: (1) there is insufficient evidence to support his convictions for Level 2 felony conspiracy to commit burglary and Level 5 felony aiding, inducing, or causing domestic battery; and (2) his sentence is inappropriate. Concluding that: (1) there is sufficient evidence to support Kennedy's convictions; and (2) Kennedy has failed to show that his sentence is inappropriate, we affirm the trial court's judgment.

[2] We affirm.

Issues

1. Whether there is sufficient evidence to support Kennedy's convictions for Level 2 felony conspiracy to commit burglary and Level 5 felony aiding, inducing, or causing domestic battery.

2. Whether Kennedy's sentence is inappropriate.

Facts

[3] The facts most favorable to the judgment reveal that, in July 2022, Michael Abbott (“Abbott”) and Stephanie Petro (“Petro”) were married but separated. Petro had moved out of their home and was staying with two friends, Jennifer Wagaman (“Wagaman”) and Brandy Wages (“Wages”).

[4] On July 24, 2022, Abbott and Jacob Bush (“Bush”) were using drugs, including heroin, methamphetamine, and fentanyl, at Abbott's home. Abbott had in his possession $5,000 in cash (“the money”) that was rolled up in a rubberband. He planned to use the money to purchase more drugs.

[5] While Abbott and Bush were using drugs, Petro arrived at the house and became angry at Abbott when he refused to give her any drugs. Petro subsequently ran “out of the house real quick[,]” and Abbott told Bush that “the money[ ] [was] gone” and that Petro had taken it. (Tr. Vol. 2 at 228). Later that afternoon, twenty-one-year-old Kennedy arrived at Abbott's house, and Kennedy, Abbott, and Bush used methamphetamine and fentanyl. While the three men were using drugs, they devised “a plan” to go to Wagaman and Wages’ house (“the house”) to retrieve the money. (Tr. Vol. 2 at 242). Bush was initially reluctant to participate in the plan because “he knew better than to go.” (Tr. Vol. 2 at 216). However, the three men subsequently “agreed to” participate in the plan. (Tr. Vol. 2 at 217).

[6] In the early morning hours of July 25, 2022, Kennedy, Abbott, and Bush, who were each carrying a gun, went to the house. Abbott was wearing a mask, and Bush had covered his face with a bandana. Abbott opened the front door, and the three men walked inside the house. Wages was not at home, but Wagaman was sitting on a couch in the living room and Petro was in the bathroom. Wagaman and Wages’ dog, Luscious (“Luscious”) was in the kitchen, which was adjacent to the living room.

[7] When Abbott located Petro in the bathroom, he asked her if she was ready to die and began punching her. He also shot Petro with a stun gun. Wagaman could hear Petro screaming for help and the sounds of Abbott punching Petro. While Abbott was beating Petro, Kennedy, who was still armed with a gun, stood in front of Wagaman, who was still sitting on the couch. At some point, Kennedy went into the kitchen, and Luscious barked at him one time. Kennedy told Luscious not to bite him and shot her eight times as she made her way to Wagaman in the living room. Luscious, who left a trail of blood from the kitchen through the living room, died in front of the couch at Wagaman's feet.

[8] Shortly thereafter, Abbott grabbed a bag that belonged to Petro, and the three men ran from the house. Wagaman called 911, and several law enforcement officers were dispatched to the house. Petro, who appeared to be in shock, had burn marks from the stun gun and blood in her hair.

[9] When law enforcement officers located Kennedy two days later, Kennedy ran from the officers and barricaded himself inside a house. The officers surrounded that house and used a loudspeaker to order Kennedy to exit it. Thirty minutes later, Kennedy came out of that house, and the officers arrested him.

[10] In August 2022, the State charged Kennedy with Level 2 felony conspiracy to commit burglary, Level 5 felony aiding, causing, or inducing intimidation, Level 5 felony aiding, causing, or inducing domestic battery, Level 6 felony criminal recklessness, and Level 6 felony killing a domestic animal. During Kennedy's July 2025 trial, the jury heard the facts as set forth above and convicted him of the five charged offenses.

[11] At Kennedy's September 2025 sentencing hearing, the State played a jail telephone call that Kennedy had made to his mother following the trial. During the telephone call, Kennedy asked his mother if his former girlfriend (“his former girlfriend”) was planning to bring their young daughter to his sentencing hearing. When Kennedy's mother told Kennedy that his former girlfriend would not allow the young child to attend the sentencing hearing, Kennedy called his former girlfriend profane names and threatened to kill her, her son, and her son's father.

[12] Also, at the sentencing hearing, the trial court reviewed Kennedy's pre-sentence investigation report (“the PSI”), which revealed that Kennedy began using heroin and fentanyl when he was fifteen years old. Further, Kennedy described his drug use as “Heavily, All day Everyday.” (App. Vol. 2 at 221). In addition, Kennedy reported that his drugs of choice were methamphetamine, heroin, and crack.

[13] The PSI also included Kennedy's criminal history. Specifically, Kennedy has a juvenile delinquency adjudication for committing what would be Level 5 felony domestic battery with bodily injury to a pregnant woman and a Class A misdemeanor conviction for carrying a handgun without a license. In addition, at the time Kennedy committed the offenses in this case, he was on supervised probation for the Class A misdemeanor conviction. He also had a pending 2021 charge for Level 6 felony unlawful possession or use of a legend drug and a pending 2022 charge for Level 6 felony possession of a narcotic drug.

[14] Further, while Kennedy was incarcerated in the county jail pending the trial in this case, the State charged him with Level 6 felony intimidation and Level 6 felony obstruction of justice for threatening potential witnesses in this case and attempting to coerce them to lie if they testified. The PSI further revealed that while incarcerated in the county jail, Kennedy had received “four (4) disciplinary write-ups resulting in seventy-five (75) days lock-down and loss of privileges.” (App. Vol. 2 at 218). The disciplinary write-ups resulted from Kennedy fighting with inmates and refusing to obey corrections officers.

[15] The trial court found that Kennedy's criminal history, which “show[ed] an uninterrupted series of criminal acts, including acts of violence, since October of 2018, when [Kennedy] was seventeen (17) years of age[,]” was an aggravating factor. (App. Vol. 3 at 32). The trial court further found the following aggravating factors: (1) Kennedy's crimes showed “a substantial degree of care and planning[;]” (2) Kennedy's threats and attempts to coerce witnesses to lie for him at his trial resulted in the State filing felony charges against Kennedy; (3) Kennedy's “disturbing history of misconduct while incarcerated awaiting trial in th[is] cause ․ show[ed] a pattern of disobedience, violence, dis[d]ain for persons in authority, and antisocial behavior[;]” and (4) Kennedy had a lengthy history of substance abuse and had failed to obtain help for those issues either voluntarily or through court-ordered probation services. (App. Vol. 3 at 32-33). In addition, the trial court found as a mitigating factor that Kennedy had the support of family and friends that could aid in his recovery. However, the trial court gave little weight to this mitigating factor because this support had “had no positive influence upon [Kennedy] in curtailing his criminal activities.” (App. Vol. 3 at 31).

[16] Thereafter, the trial court sentenced Kennedy to the advisory sentence for each of his convictions. Specifically, the trial court sentenced Kennedy to seventeen and one-half (171/212) years for the Level 2 felony conspiracy to commit burglary conviction, three (3) years for the Level 5 felony aiding, inducing, or causing domestic battery conviction, one (1) year for the Level 6 felony criminal recklessness conviction, and one (1) year for the Level 6 felony killing a domestic animal conviction. Further, the trial court ordered the sentences for the Level 2 felony conspiracy to commit burglary conviction, the Level 5 aiding, inducing, or causing domestic battery conviction, and the Level 6 felony criminal recklessness conviction to run consecutively to each other. In addition, the trial court ordered the sentence for the Level 6 felony killing a domestic animal conviction to run concurrently with the sentence for the Level 6 criminal recklessness conviction, resulting in an aggregate sentence of twenty-one and one-half (211/212) years to be executed in the Department of Correction (“the DOC”).

[17] Kennedy now appeals.

Decision

[18] Kennedy argues that: (1) there is insufficient evidence to support his convictions for Level 2 conspiracy to commit burglary and Level 5 felony aiding, inducing, or causing domestic battery; and (2) his sentence is inappropriate. We address each of his contentions in turn.

1. Sufficiency of the Evidence

[19] Kennedy first argues that there is insufficient evidence to support convictions for Level 2 felony conspiracy to commit burglary and Level 5 felony aiding, inducing, or causing domestic battery. However, Kennedy has failed to set forth the elements of these offenses and identify which of those elements were not supported by sufficient evidence. Further, he has failed to cite any case law to support his arguments. Kennedy has, therefore, waived appellate review of these arguments. See Ind. Appellate Rule 46(A)(8)(a) (requiring that each contention in the appellant's brief be supported by cogent argument and citation to applicable authority).

[20] Waiver notwithstanding, “[o]ur standard for reviewing evidentiary sufficiency challenges is well established, as we have made clear that it is the fact-finder's role, not that of appellate courts, to assess witness credibility and weigh the evidence to determine whether it is sufficient to support a conviction.” Konkle v. State, 253 N.E.3d 1068, 1090 (Ind. 2025) (cleaned up). “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.” Id. (cleaned up). We review only the evidence most favorable to the verdict and the reasonable inferences therefrom and will reverse “only where it is shown that no reasonable fact-finder could find the elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id. at 1090-91 (cleaned up).

A. Level 2 Felony Conspiracy to Commit Burglary

[21] The State charged Kennedy with Level 2 felony conspiracy to commit burglary, in relevant part, as follows:

․ Quintin A. Kennedy, with intent to commit the felony of Burglary, while armed with a deadly weapon, which is defined as follows:

Breaking and entering the dwelling of another individual with the intent to commit a felony or theft therein, said act having been carried out while armed with a deadly weapon;

did agree with another person or persons to commit said crime of Burglary while armed with a deadly weapon; and in furtherance of this agreement, Quintin A. Kennedy or the person or persons with whom he agreed did commit one or more of the following overt acts:

1) Obtained or retained a firearm;

2) Went to the area of [the house] for the purpose of committing Burglary;

3) Entered [the house] for the purpose of committing Burglary[.]

(App. Vol. 2 at 25).

[22] Indiana Code § 35-43-2-1 provides that “[a] person who breaks and enters the building or structure of another person, with intent to commit a felony or theft in it, commits burglary, a Level 5 felony.” However, the offense is a Level 2 felony if it is committed while armed with a deadly weapon. Ind. Code § 35-43-2-1(3)(A). Further, Indiana Code § 35-41-5-2(a) provides that “[a] person conspires to commit a felony when, with intent to commit the felony, the person agrees with another person to commit the felony. A conspiracy to commit a felony is a felony of the same level as the underlying felony.” Further, “[t]he state must allege and prove that either the person or the person with whom he or she agreed performed an overt act in furtherance of the agreement.” I.C. § 35-41-5-2(b).

[23] The State is not required to establish the existence of a formal express agreement to prove a conspiracy. Fouts v. State, 207 N.E.3d 1257, 1264 (Ind. Ct. App. 2023), opinion adhered to as modified on reh'g, 210 N.E.3d 902 (Ind. Ct. App. 2023), trans. denied. “It is sufficient if the minds of the parties meet understandingly to bring about an intelligent and deliberate agreement to commit the offense.” Id. (cleaned up). “The agreement as well as the requisite guilty knowledge and intent may be inferred from circumstantial evidence alone, including overt acts of the parties in pursuance of the criminal act.” Erkins v. State, 13 N.E.3d 400, 407 (Ind. 2014) (cleaned up), reh'g denied. Further, there is no requirement that the underlying felony actually be committed or even attempted. Saintignon v. State, 118 N.E.3d 778, 791 (Ind. Ct. App. 2019), trans. denied.

[24] Here, our review of the evidence reveals that while Kennedy, Abbott, and Bush were using methamphetamine and fentanyl, the three men devised and agreed to participate in a plan to go to the house to retrieve the money that Petro had allegedly stolen from Abbott. Thereafter, Kennedy, Abbott, and Bush committed all three overt acts alleged in the charging information. Specifically, the three men obtained and retained firearms, went to the house for the purpose of committing burglary, and entered the house for the purpose of committing burglary. This evidence is sufficient to support Kennedy's conviction for Level 2 felony conspiracy to commit burglary.

B. Level 5 Felony Aiding, Inducing, or Causing Domestic Battery

[25] The State charged Kennedy with Level 5 felony aiding, inducing, or causing domestic battery as follows:

․ Quintin A. Kennedy did knowingly[ ] aid, induce or cause another person or persons to commit the crime of domestic battery by means of a deadly weapon said act having been committed while Quintin Kennedy or another person or persons knowingly touched Stephanie A. Petro, a family or household member, in a rude[,] insolent or angry manner, said touching being committed with a deadly weapon[.]

(App. Vol. 2 at 27).

[26] Indiana Code § 35-42-2-1.3(a)(1) provides that “a person who knowingly or intentionally ․ touches a family or household member in a rude, insolent, or angry manner ․ commits domestic battery, a Class A misdemeanor.” Further, the offense is a Level 5 felony if it is “committed with a deadly weapon against a family or household member.” Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1.3(c)(2). This Court has previously held that a stun gun qualified as a deadly weapon because the stun gun had the apparent ability to cause serious bodily injury and the defendant acted in a manner that put the victim in fear for her life. Grogg v. State, 156 N.E.3d 744, 750 (Ind. Ct. App. 2020), trans. denied.

[27] Regarding accomplice liability, Indiana Code § 35-41-2-4 provides that “[a] person who knowingly or intentionally aids, induces, or causes another person to commit an offense commits that offense, even if the other person: (1) has not been prosecuted for the offense; (2) has not been convicted of the offense; or (3) has been acquitted of the offense.” It is well-established that the responsibility of a principal and an accomplice is the same. Taylor v. State, 840 N.E.2d 324, 338 (Ind. 2006). In determining whether there was sufficient evidence for purposes of accomplice liability, we consider the following factors: (1) presence at the scene of the crime; (2) companionship with another engaged in criminal activity; (3) failure to oppose the commission of the crime; and (4) a defendant's conduct before, during, and after the occurrence of the crime. Garland v. State, 788 N.E.2d 425, 431 (Ind. 2003).

[28] Here, we first note that it is undisputed that Kennedy was present at the scene when Abbott used the stun gun on his wife, Petro. Second, there is an abundance of evidence that speaks to Kennedy's companionship with Abbott. Specifically, Kennedy and Abbott used methamphetamine and fentanyl together while planning to go to the house to retrieve the money. Further, both men were armed when they entered the house together. Third, Kennedy did nothing to oppose the commission of the crime. Fourth, during the commission of the crime, Kennedy committed two additional offenses, Level 6 felony criminal recklessness and Level 6 felony killing a domestic animal. Specifically, while Kennedy was in the house, he shot his gun eight times at Luscious as she stumbled from the kitchen to the living room and killed her. Further, after the occurrence of the crime, Kennedy left the house with Abbott. In addition, when law enforcement officers located Kennedy two days later, he ran from the officers and barricaded himself inside a house for thirty minutes. After considering these four factors, we conclude that there is sufficient evidence to support Kennedy's conviction for Level 5 felony aiding, inducing, or causing domestic battery.

2. Inappropriate Sentence

[29] Kennedy also argues that his twenty-one and one-half (211/212) year aggregate sentence is inappropriate. He specifically contends that we “should revise [his] sentences in this matter to an aggregate of eleven and a half (111/212) years[.]” (Kennedy's Br. 8).

[30] Indiana Appellate Rule 7(B) provides that we may revise a sentence authorized by statute if, after due consideration of the trial court's decision, we find that the sentence is inappropriate in light of the nature of the offense and the character of the offender. The defendant bears the burden of persuading this Court that his sentence is inappropriate. Childress v. State, 848 N.E.2d 1073, 1080 (Ind. 2006). Whether we regard a sentence as inappropriate turns on the “culpability of the defendant, the severity of the crime, the damage done to others, and myriad other factors that come to light in a given case.” Cardwell v. State, 895 N.E.2d 1219, 1224 (Ind. 2008). Sentence modification under Rule 7(B) is reserved for a “rare and exceptional case.” Skeens v. State, 191 N.E.3d 916, 923 (Ind. Ct. App. 2022) (cleaned up).

[31] When determining whether a sentence is inappropriate, we acknowledge that the advisory sentence is the starting point the Legislature has selected as an appropriate sentence for the crime committed. Childress, 848 N.E.2d at 1081. Here, a jury convicted Kennedy of Level 2 felony conspiracy to commit burglary, Level 5 felony aiding, inducing, or causing domestic battery, Level 6 felony criminal recklessness, and Level 6 felony killing a domestic animal. The sentencing range for a Level 2 felony is between ten (10) and thirty (30) years, and the advisory sentence is seventeen and one-half (171/212) years. See I.C. § 35-50-2-4.5. Further, the sentencing range for a Level 5 felony is between one (1) and six (6) years, and the advisory sentence is three (3) years. See I.C. § 35-50-2-6(b). Lastly, the sentencing range for a Level 6 felony is between six (6) months and two and one-half (21/212) years, and the advisory sentence is one (1) year. I.C. § 35-50-2-7(b).

[32] The trial court sentenced Kennedy to the advisory term for each of his convictions. Further, the trial court ordered the sentences for the Level 2 felony conspiracy to commit burglary conviction, the Level 5 aiding, inducing, or causing domestic battery conviction, and the Level 6 felony criminal recklessness conviction to run consecutively to each other. In addition, the trial court ordered the sentence for the Level 6 felony killing a domestic animal conviction to run concurrently with the sentence for the Level 6 criminal recklessness conviction, resulting in an aggregate sentence of twenty-one and one-half (211/212) years to be executed in the DOC. This sentence is well below the maximum sentence that the trial court could have imposed.

[33] With regard to the nature of the offenses, Kennedy, Bush, and Abbott devised and agreed to a plan to go to the house, while armed with firearms, to retrieve the money that Abbott had accused Petro of taking. The three men then went to the house, opened the front door, and walked inside the house. While Abbott punched Petro and shot her with a stun gun, Kennedy stood in front of Wagaman, who was sitting on a couch in the living room. At some point, Kennedy walked into the kitchen, and when Luscious barked at him just one time, Kennedy shot Luscious eight times as she made her way to Wagaman. Luscious, who left a trail of blood from the kitchen to the living room, died in front of the couch at Wagaman's feet. Thereafter, Abbott grabbed one of Petro's bags, and the three men ran out of the house. When law enforcement officers found Kennedy two days later, he ran from the officers and barricaded himself inside a house for thirty minutes.

[34] With regard to his character, we note that when then twenty-one-year-old Kennedy committed the offenses in this case, he was on probation for one conviction and had two pending felony charges in two separate causes. In addition, while Kennedy was incarcerated pending trial in this case, the State charged Kennedy with two additional felonies after he threatened potential witnesses and attempted to coerce them into lying if they were called to testify at his trial. Kennedy's former contacts with the law have not caused him to reform himself. See Jenkins v. State, 909 N.E.2d 1080, 1086 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009), trans. denied. We further note that Kennedy's threats to kill his former girlfriend, who is the mother of his young daughter, her son, and her son's father reflect poorly on his character. In addition, Kennedy's four disciplinary write-ups for fighting inmates in the county jail and refusing to obey corrections officers also reflect poorly on his character.

[35] Based on the nature of the offenses and his character, Kennedy has failed to persuade this Court that his twenty-one and one-half (211/212) year aggregate sentence is inappropriate. We further note that this is simply not one of those rare and exceptional cases for which a sentence modification under Rule 7(B) is reserved. Therefore, we affirm Kennedy's sentence.

[36] Affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Ind. Code § 35-43-2-1 (burglary); I.C. § 35-41-5-2 (conspiracy).

2.   I.C. § 35-42-2-1.3 (domestic battery); I.C. § 35-41-2-4 (aiding, inducing, or causing).

3.   I.C. § 35-42-2-2.

4.   I.C. § 35-46-3-12. The jury also convicted Kennedy of aiding, inducing, or causing intimidation. However, at Kennedy's sentencing hearing, the trial court vacated that conviction on double jeopardy grounds.

Pyle, Judge.

Bradford, J., and Kenworthy, J., concur.