Mark A. Tyson v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
49A02-1603-CR-472
| Ind. Ct. App. | Feb 16, 2017Background
- In May 2014, Mark Tyson entered a home where Patrick Martin (who had been showing cash) and Aleem Thomas were present; Tyson was seen carrying a shotgun and Keri Brewer carried a box cutter.
- Tyson pointed the shotgun, demanded drugs/money, and then shot Martin; Tyson and Brewer fled.
- Four witnesses (Thomas, homeowner Angela Kosarue, and two children P.P. and K.P.) each identified Tyson in a photo array and made in‑court identifications. Tyson did not object at trial to those identifications.
- Tyson was charged with murder, felony murder, robbery (charged as Class A), and a firearm enhancement; the enhancement was later dismissed.
- A jury convicted Tyson of murder and Class C felony robbery; the trial court sentenced him to 68 years. Tyson appealed, arguing (1) fundamental error from suggestive identifications and (2) insufficient evidence for robbery.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether fundamental error resulted from allegedly suggestive out‑of‑court photo identifications that tainted in‑court IDs | State relied on testimony and photo‑array identifications by four witnesses to identify Tyson | Tyson argued a detective’s method produced a substantially likely misidentification (at least as to Thomas) that tainted all subsequent IDs and that he preserved relief via fundamental‑error review | No fundamental error: even assuming Thomas’s out‑of‑court ID were flawed, those IDs were cumulative of three independent identifications; no evidence of irregularity for the others, so relief denied |
| Whether evidence was sufficient to sustain the robbery conviction | State argued evidence showed Tyson took money/marijuana (from Thomas) by force or by putting victims in fear | Tyson argued the State failed to prove he took anything from Martin specifically | Sufficiency affirmed: conviction may rest on property taken from Thomas (charged alternatively); evidence showed Tyson took money and marijuana from Thomas |
Key Cases Cited
- Griffith v. State, 59 N.E.3d 947 (framework for fundamental‑error review)
- Pattison v. State, 54 N.E.3d 361 (definition and narrowness of fundamental‑error exception)
- Wright v. State, 730 N.E.2d 713 (due process/fundamental error standard language)
- Halliburton v. State, 1 N.E.3d 670 (fundamental‑error relief limited to egregious circumstances)
- Wilkes v. State, 7 N.E.3d 402 (admission of cumulative evidence does not require reversal for fundamental error)
- Willis v. State, 27 N.E.3d 1065 (standard for sufficiency review)