Victoria Salazar, Appellant-Defendant v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff (2026)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

[1] The Indiana Constitution guarantees a criminal defendant the right to be tried in the county where the offense was committed, but venue is not an element of the crime, so the State must prove venue only by a preponderance of the evidence. Victoria Salazar was convicted, after a bench trial in Marion County, of Class A misdemeanor domestic battery ¹ for striking R.B. while he drove her toward a hotel. Salazar contends the State failed to prove the battery occurred in Marion County because no witness identified the precise geographic location of the vehicle at the moment Salazar struck R.B. Because the circumstantial evidence permitted the trial court to find by a preponderance of the evidence that the offense occurred in Marion County, we affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

[2] On January 9, 2026, Salazar and R.B., who had been in a romantic relationship for about a month, left Salazar's residence in R.B.’s car so that R.B. could take Salazar to a hotel. While R.B. was driving, Salazar grabbed the steering wheel, so R.B. pulled the car over to the side of the road and parked. As he pulled the car over, Salazar struck him in the face, cutting him. R.B. exited the car and called the police, who responded and photographed his injuries.

[3] The State charged Salazar with one count of Class A misdemeanor domestic battery. At the bench trial on March 10, 2026, the State presented three witnesses: Officer Gerry Torres, R.B., and Detective Tobi Cobian. R.B. testified that he was struck by Salazar as he pulled the car over to the right side of the road to park, that he left the car running, and that he exited the car and called the police. Officer Torres, an evidence technician with the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department, testified he was dispatched to 5427 East 38th Street, which is in Marion County, in response to the domestic disturbance, and that he photographed R.B.’s injuries at that location.

[4] After the State rested, Salazar moved for involuntary dismissal under Indiana Trial Rule 41(B) and argued the State had not established venue because no witness had identified where the battery occurred. The trial court reviewed Officer Torres's testimony and denied the motion because venue had been established. Salazar testified in her own defense and acknowledged that she was arrested from the scene. The trial court found Salazar guilty and imposed a 365-day sentence.

Discussion and Decision

[5] A defendant has a constitutional and statutory right to be tried in the county in which the offense was committed. Ind. Const. Art. 1, § 13(a) (“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall have the right to a public trial, by an impartial jury, in the county in which the offense shall have been committed[.]”); Ind. Code § 35-32-2-1(a) (“Criminal actions shall be tried in the county where the offense was committed, except as otherwise provided by law.”). However, “[v]enue is not an element of the offense.” Perry v. State, 78 N.E.3d 1, 10 (Ind. Ct. App. 2017) (quoting Smith v. State, 835 N.E.2d 1072, 1074 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005)). Therefore, the State must prove it “only by a preponderance of the evidence rather than beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id. at 11.

[6] We review a claim that the evidence was insufficient to prove venue in the same manner as other challenges to sufficiency of evidence. Id. We apply “a deferential standard, in which we neither reweigh the evidence nor judge witness credibility.” Powell v. State, 151 N.E.3d 256, 262 (Ind. 2020). Instead, “we consider only the evidence supporting the judgment and any reasonable inferences drawn from that evidence.” Id. Circumstantial evidence, standing alone, may be sufficient to establish venue. Peacock v. State, 126 N.E.3d 892, 897 (Ind. Ct. App. 2019).

[7] Salazar claims the circumstantial evidence presented at trial could not permit the trial court to infer that she battered R.B. in Marion County. We disagree. R.B. testified that Salazar struck him as he pulled the car over to park and that he exited the car and called police.² Officer Torres was asked whether he had been “called to 5427 East 38th Street regarding a domestic disturbance,” and he answered, “Yes, I was.” (Tr. Vol. II at 7.) He was then asked whether that address “is ․ located in Marion County,” and he answered, “Yes, it is.” (Id.) From this evidence, the trial court could reasonably infer it was more likely than not that the battery occurred at or near the location in Marion County from which R.B. called and to which the officers responded. See, e.g., Shields v. State, 490 N.E.2d 292, 295 (Ind. 1986) (holding circumstantial evidence of venue in Lake County was sufficient where dispatched officer was patrolman with Lake County Police Department and witness testified crime occurred in Hobart Township, which was in Lake County), reh'g denied. Therefore, the State proved venue by a preponderance of the evidence.

Conclusion

[8] The State presented sufficient evidence of venue in Marion County. We therefore affirm Salazar's conviction of Class A misdemeanor domestic battery.

[9] Affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1.3(a)(1).

2.   Salazar also notes “R.B. ran from the scene to a parking lot but there was no evidence of how far away the parking lot was from the fight's [sic].” (Appellant's Br. at 7-8.) R.B. did, in fact, testify that he “ran away.” (Tr. Vol. II at 12.) However, because that testimony is not “evidence supporting the judgment[,]” Powell, 151 N.E.3d at 262, we cannot consider it.

May, Judge.

Pyle, J., and Scheele, J., concur.