Michael Parrish v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.), 49A05-1604-CR-794

In February 2014, Michael Parrish forced entry into D.K.P.’s home, held a knife to her throat, and restrained and assaulted her while accomplices were present.
Parrish forced D.K.P. to walk through rooms, took money and property, and committed multiple sexual assaults (digital vaginal penetration and insertion into the anus) while threatening her.
D.K.P. escaped, reported the crimes, and medical examiners documented injuries to her genital and anal areas.
The State charged Parrish with multiple offenses including class A burglary and three counts of class A criminal deviate conduct; after a bench trial the court convicted him on many counts and imposed an aggregate 60-year sentence.
On appeal Parrish challenged the sufficiency of the evidence for (1) the breaking-and-entering element of class A burglary and (2) two counts of class B criminal deviate conduct, arguing factual impossibility and insufficiency.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Parrish)	Held
Whether evidence proved "breaking" for class A burglary	Testimony shows Parrish forced entry by pushing victim after she opened door; slightest force suffices	No breaking because victim opened door voluntarily	Affirmed — pushing victim into dwelling after door opened satisfies breaking
Whether evidence proved criminal deviate conduct	Victim's uncorroborated testimony plus corroborating physical injuries and accomplice remark suffice	Impossibility: Parrish claims both hands occupied (holding hair and knife) so could not have penetrated victim	Affirmed — victim testimony sufficient and corroborated; physical possibility supported by evidence

Bailey v. State, 907 N.E.2d 1003 (Ind. 2009) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence)
Hall v. State, 870 N.E.2d 449 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007) (using slight force to gain unauthorized entry satisfies breaking)
Davis v. State, 770 N.E.2d 319 (Ind. 2002) (discussion of breaking element)
Jenkins v. State, 34 N.E.3d 258 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (pushing past victim to enter apartment supports breaking)
Anderson v. State, 37 N.E.3d 972 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (rushing victim after door opened supports breaking)
Smith v. State, 535 N.E.2d 117 (Ind. 1989) (some physical movement of a structural impediment is necessary for breaking)
Dew v. State, 439 N.E.2d 624 (Ind. 1982) (use of physical force against victim to gain entry can satisfy breaking)
Johnson v. State, 837 N.E.2d 209 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (uncorroborated victim testimony can sustain sexual offense conviction)