987 N.E.2d 92
Ind. Ct. App.2013Background
- Clemons was convicted of possession of an animal for purposes of an animal fighting contest (Class D), possession of animal fighting paraphernalia (Class B), and promoting an animal fighting contest (Class D).
- Evidence showed Clemons operated a cockfighting operation on his Shelby County farm with numerous roosters, including dubbing, tethering to barrels, and removal of spurs; there were feeding and training features on site.
- Investigators found cockfighting paraphernalia and breeding/grooming tools, medicines, and manuals, plus a Filipino knife used in cockfights; a large number of birds were identified on the farm.
- Trade/journal material and a surveillance/interview history tied Clemons to cockfighting activity, including a magazine article and admissions about breeding, selling birds, and knowledge of cockfighting practices.
- Officers obtained a search warrant and arrested the activity; evidence included birds, cages, a knife, and training/rearing materials; Clemons acknowledged past involvement but claimed no ongoing fight activity.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency to convict for possession for fighting | State argues evidence shows Clemons knowingly possessed birds for fighting. | Clemons contends no proof he possessed birds to fight. | Sufficient evidence supports conviction. |
| Sufficiency to convict for animal fighting paraphernalia | State argues paraphernalia and intent to fight were proven by knife and related items. | Clemons contends no proven intent to violate rules. | Sufficient evidence supports conviction. |
| Sufficiency to convict for promoting an animal fighting contest | State argues there was intent and training/harboring consistent with promotion. | Clemons asserts lack of intent and training indicators. | Sufficient evidence supports conviction. |
Key Cases Cited
- Perez v. State, 872 N.E.2d 208 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (sufficiency review; adopt favorable inferences)
- Goodner v. State, 685 N.E.2d 1058 (Ind. 1997) (intent may be inferred from surrounding circumstances)
- T.J. v. State, 932 N.E.2d 192 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (definition of animal fighting violation and related elements)