Michael J. Smith v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.), 71A05-1608-CR-1883

In the early morning of Aug. 1, 2015, three vehicles (a Suburban, a Tahoe, and a Lancer) met at a gas station in South Bend; occupants from the Tahoe and Lancer discussed "handling business" after identifying someone in the Suburban.
Bryant (Tahoe) fired six shots into the Suburban’s passenger side; the Suburban attempted to flee but stalled in a sharp turn.
While vehicles were in the intersection, Michael J. Smith (in the Lancer) fired five shots at the rear/passenger side of the Suburban; Sharp (a passenger) was killed and Stephen (driver) was wounded.
Smith was charged with three counts of Level 5 criminal recklessness (one count per occupant) and later added a Level 1 attempted murder charge as to Stephen; a jury convicted on all counts.
At sentencing the court merged counts and imposed an aggregate executed sentence (including 38 years for attempted murder); Smith appealed, arguing insufficient evidence for attempted murder and that the court erred by refusing his self-defense jury instruction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for attempted murder	State: Evidence (multiple shots fired toward Suburban, statements by Smith, surrounding circumstances) supports inference of intent to kill	Smith: Shots were not likely to cause death given vehicle positions; insufficient to prove specific intent	Affirmed — sufficient evidence; firing at vehicle and post-shooting statement support intent inference
Exclusion of self-defense instruction	State: No applicable evidence that Smith reasonably feared imminent harm	Smith: Testimony (Irving) that Stephen appeared threatening when he exited the Suburban supports self-defense instruction	Affirmed — trial court did not abuse discretion; no evidence Smith faced imminent threat and he was an aggressor

Jackson v. State, 50 N.E.3d 767 (Ind. 2016) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence)
Booker v. State, 741 N.E.2d 748 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000) (intent to kill may be inferred from deliberate use of a deadly weapon)
Chapman v. State, 719 N.E.2d 1232 (Ind. 1999) (deadly-weapon use supports intent inference)
Corbin v. State, 840 N.E.2d 424 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (discharging a weapon toward a victim supports attempted murder inference)
Perez v. State, 872 N.E.2d 208 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (firing multiple rounds at a moving vehicle supports specific intent to kill)
McCowan v. State, 27 N.E.3d 760 (Ind. 2015) (standard for reviewing jury-instruction rulings)
Hoskins v. State, 737 N.E.2d 383 (Ind. 2000) (instruction applicable only if evidence supports it)
Creager v. State, 737 N.E.2d 771 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000) (defendant entitled to instruction on any defense with some evidentiary basis)
Miller v. State, 720 N.E.2d 696 (Ind. 2000) (elements of self-defense)
White v. State, 726 N.E.2d 831 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000) (no self-defense instruction absent evidence of impending danger)
Dalton v. State, 56 N.E.3d 644 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016) (when testimony conflicts, appellate review favors trial-court rulings)