Dwayne Casteel v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
49A02-1606-CR-1476
Ind. Ct. App.Jan 30, 2017Background
- In October 2015, Dwayne Casteel entered an apartment where victim Glen Julbert had met an escort (Mary Day) advertised on backpage.com; Julbert was ordered to undress and was later confronted by Casteel and two others.
- Casteel (armed) forced Julbert to the ground, took $410 from his wallet, his cell phone, and cigarettes, threatened to kill him if he called police, and told him to leave.
- Julbert delayed reporting due to embarrassment and threats; after his phone was misused, he reported the robbery to police, identified the apartment and the backpage ad, and later confronted Day at her door with officers nearby.
- Police arrested Casteel when he opened the door; Day was found hiding in a bedroom closet; officers were told a handgun was found in Day’s purse though Detective Townsend never personally saw the gun.
- Casteel was tried by jury, convicted of Level 5 felony robbery, and sentenced to six years; he appealed alleging improper admission of hearsay and insufficient evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of hearsay about a gun | State: testimony about officers telling Townsend a gun was found was permissible as background and officer conduct testimony | Casteel: testimony was hearsay (and witness lacked personal knowledge under Evid. R. 602) and should have been excluded | Court found the hearsay objection waived for failure to cite authority; alternatively, any error was harmless because other testimony showed Day wore a gun and Townsend was cross‑examined about lack of personal knowledge |
| Sufficiency of the evidence for robbery conviction | State: Victim’s testimony and attendant facts sufficiently proved robbery beyond a reasonable doubt | Casteel: sought reweighing of evidence and credibility challenges | Court held the victim’s uncorroborated testimony was sufficient to support the conviction; appellate court will not reweigh credibility |
Key Cases Cited
- Filice v. State, 886 N.E.2d 24 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (trial court evidentiary rulings reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- Dixon v. State, 967 N.E.2d 1090 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (definition of abuse of discretion for evidentiary rulings)
- Granger v. State, 946 N.E.2d 1209 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (harmless‑error standard for erroneously admitted evidence)
- Lafayette v. State, 917 N.E.2d 660 (Ind. 2009) (harmless error standard explanation)
- Wales v. State, 768 N.E.2d 513 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002) (erroneous evidence reversal standard)
- Davis v. State, 835 N.E.2d 1102 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (issues waived when not supported with cogent argument and authority)
- Bush v. State, 929 N.E.2d 897 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (party cannot shift objection basis on appeal)
- Atteberry v. State, 911 N.E.2d 601 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (standard for sufficiency review)
- Baumgartner v. State, 891 N.E.2d 1131 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (substantial evidence and reasonable inferences standard)
- Drane v. State, 867 N.E.2d 144 (Ind. 2007) (inference sufficient; no need to exclude all hypotheses of innocence)
- Jenkins v. State, 34 N.E.3d 258 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (a victim’s uncorroborated testimony can support conviction)