Jeffrey Brinkley v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
49A04-1511-CR-1920
| Ind. Ct. App. | Oct 5, 2016Background
- On Dec. 27, 2013, Jeffrey Brinkley (father of one child) returned to Rhea Miller’s home, argued with her, grabbed her cell phone, and struck her multiple times in the face.
- Miller reported pain, ringing in her ear, and developed a black eye two days later; her child T.O. witnessed the incident and struck Brinkley with a fan to stop him.
- Police were called; Miller told Officer Gray she had been struck five times and experienced pain and ear ringing; T.O. corroborated seeing Brinkley standing over Miller and a mark on Miller’s cheek.
- Brinkley had undergone ankle surgery a week earlier and introduced medical records at trial asserting he was physically incapable of the conduct alleged.
- The State charged Brinkley with Class D felony domestic battery (with child present), Class A misdemeanor domestic battery, and battery as a Class A misdemeanor; a jury convicted him and the court imposed an aggregate executed sentence of 675 days.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Brinkley's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to support convictions | Miller’s eyewitness testimony, T.O.’s observations, and Miller’s statements to police prove the elements (bodily injury, domestic relationship, child present for felony count) | Medical records and testimony about recent ankle surgery show Brinkley could not have physically committed the conduct; arguing insufficient evidence | Affirmed: testimony of victim plus corroboration is sufficient; appellate court will not reweigh credibility |
Key Cases Cited
- Boggs v. State, 928 N.E.2d 855 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (appellate court will not reweigh evidence or assess witness credibility on sufficiency review)
- Fuentes v. State, 10 N.E.3d 68 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (review considers evidence most favorable to the verdict and reasonable inferences)
- Oster v. State, 992 N.E.2d 871 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (conflicting evidence viewed in light most favorable to trial court)
- Lock v. State, 971 N.E.2d 71 (Ind. 2012) (affirm unless no reasonable fact-finder could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt)
- McHenry v. State, 820 N.E.2d 124 (Ind. 2005) (jury’s province to weigh conflicting evidence)
- Bailey v. State, 979 N.E.2d 133 (Ind. 2012) (conviction may rest on uncorroborated testimony of a single witness)
- Hape v. State, 903 N.E.2d 977 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (factfinder, not appellate court, assesses witness credibility)