Roderick D. Whitney, Appellant-Defendant v. State of Indiana, Appellee-Plaintiff (2026)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

[1] Roderick D. Whitney appeals following his convictions of Level 6 felony domestic battery in the presence of a child ¹ and Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement.² Whitney argues that the State failed to present sufficient evidence to support his Level 6 felony domestic battery conviction. We affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

[2] Whitney and A.D. were in an on-again, off-again romantic relationship over the course of approximately eight years and had two sons together, ages three and seven years. Whitney and A.D. co-parented their sons even after their romantic relationship ended, and Whitney often visited A.D.’s apartment to spend time with their children. Whitney also had a two-year-old daughter from another relationship who often accompanied Whitney when he visited his older children at A.D.’s home.

[3] On February 16, 2024, A.D. picked up Whitney and his daughter to spend time with the older children at A.D.’s apartment. On the drive to her apartment, Whitney showed A.D. a picture he found on Instagram of a man named Tory, and he asked A.D. if she knew him. A.D. responded that she knew Tory, and Whitney became “quiet.” (Tr. Vol. 2 at 154.) A.D. asked Whitney if he was “okay” and offered to take him home, but Whitney responded he was “fine.” (Id.) They visited Walmart and a liquor store, continued to A.D.’s apartment, and had a “pretty normal” evening. (Id.) Whitney visited with his sons, and he and his daughter planned to stay overnight. Eventually, the children and A.D. went to bed, though Whitney stayed up playing video games. A.D. slept in her bedroom with her phone on the charger, and the children slept in the bedroom next to A.D.’s with the door open.

[4] Around 2:00 a.m., Whitney woke A.D. up by throwing a soft object, “like a pillow,” at her head. (Id. at 157.) Whitney yelled, “I knew it,” and “Bitch, admit it.” (Id.) A.D. asked Whitney what he knew and wanted her to admit, and Whitney responded that he had read A.D.’s phone. A.D. understood that Whitney had read “flirty” text messages between her and Tory on A.D.’s phone. (Id. at 153.)

[5] A.D. offered to take Whitney home. A.D. grabbed her phone from her bedroom and walked down the hallway to get her keys and bag while Whitney screamed for A.D. to take him and his daughter home. (Id. at 158.) While A.D. stood in front of the apartment's main door in the kitchen in preparation to leave, Whitney entered the room “fuming.” (Id. at 159.) Whitney yelled loud enough for the children and neighbors to hear “if it had been daytime” for A.D. to admit that she had lied to him about not seeing anyone else. (Id. at 161.) A.D. refused to speak about her relationship with Tory and repeated that she could take Whitney home. Whitney then “rushe[d]” at A.D., placed his hand on her throat, “jolt[ed]” her against the wall, pointed his finger in her face, and said, “I could kill you.” (Id. at 159.) A.D. told Whitney to let her go, which he did, and A.D. left the apartment, walked downstairs to sit inside her car, and called the police.

[6] The State subsequently charged Whitney with Level 6 felony domestic battery committed in the presence of a child less than sixteen years old, Level 6 felony intimidation,³ Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement,⁴ and Class A misdemeanor domestic battery.⁵ The trial court held a jury trial on June 17 and 18, 2025. The jury returned guilty verdicts for Level 6 felony domestic battery in the presence of a child less than sixteen years old, Class A misdemeanor domestic battery, and Class A misdemeanor resisting law enforcement. The trial court entered convictions accordingly, after it merged the Class a misdemeanor domestic battery and the Level 6 felony domestic battery convictions.

Discussion and Decision

[7] Whitney asserts the State failed to present sufficient evidence to sustain his Level 6 felony domestic battery conviction. Sufficiency of the evidence claims prompt a deferential standard of review in which we “neither reweigh the evidence nor judge witness credibility, instead reserving those matters to the province of the jury.” Hancz-Barron v. State, 235 N.E.3d 1237, 1244 (Ind. 2024). 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. This review considers “only the evidence that supports the jury's determination, not evidence that might undermine it.” Id.

[8] Domestic battery requires that the defendant “knowingly or intentionally ․ touches a family or household member in a rude, insolent, or angry manner[.]” Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1.3(a)(1). The offense is a Level 6 felony if the defendant “is at least eighteen (18) years of age and committed the offense against a family or household member in the physical presence of a child less than sixteen (16) years of age, knowing that the child was present and might be able to see or hear the offense.” Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1.3(b)(2).

[9] Whitney argues the State failed to present sufficient evidence that Whitney knew the children in A.D.’s apartment could have seen or heard him battering A.D. Whitney contends that because the State did not ask Whitney on cross-examination whether he believed the children might have seen or heard the offense, the State failed to prove that element. However, “ ‘[k]nowledge and intent are both mental states and, absent an admission by the defendant, the jury must resort to the reasonable inferences from both the direct and circumstantial evidence to determine whether the defendant has the requisite knowledge or intent to commit the offense in question.’ ” Konkle v. State, 253 N.E.3d 1068, 1091 (Ind. 2025) (quoting Stubbers v. State, 190 N.E.3d 424, 432 (Ind. Ct. App. 2022), trans. denied).

[10] Whitney testified during trial that he knew his children were present in the apartment. A.D. explained that Whitney repeatedly yelled loud enough to be heard throughout the apartment and “jolt[ed]” A.D. into the wall while the children slept in their nearby bedroom with the door open. (Tr. Vol. 2 at 159.) Thus, the State presented sufficient evidence that Whitney battered A.D. despite knowing that his children were close enough that they might have seen or heard him commit the offense. See Boyd v. State, 889 N.E.2d 321 at 326 (holding sufficient evidence that defendant knew a child might have been able to see or hear his offense even though the child was asleep). Whitney's argument that he did not know the children would be able to see or hear his offense is an invitation for us to reweigh the evidence, which we cannot do. See Hancz-Barron, 235 N.E.3d 1237 at 1244 (appellate court can “neither reweigh the evidence nor judge witness credibility, instead reserving those matters to the province of the jury.”).

Conclusion

[11] The State presented sufficient evidence that Whitney battered A.D. while knowing that children under the age of sixteen were close enough to see or hear his offense. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court.

[12] Affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1.3.

2.   Ind. Code § 35-44.1-3-1(a)(3).

3.   Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1(a)(4).

4.   Ind. Code § 35-44.1-3-1(a)(3).

5.   Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1.3(a)(1). Whitney was also charged with Level 6 felony strangulation, which was later dropped.

May, Judge.

Mathias, J., and Felix, J., concur.