Raul Gonzalez v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
49A02-1610-CR-2352
Ind. Ct. App.Mar 16, 2017Background
- On Feb. 29, 2016, Raul Gonzales returned to a residence shared with his wife, Paulina Gutierrez, and their children and engaged in a loud, abusive argument.
- Gutierrez asked Gonzales’s guest (Harley Baxter) to leave; police came once but did not remove Baxter. Gutierrez began packing to leave with the children.
- When Gonzales’s aunt Gloria Telles arrived to give Gutierrez a ride, Gonzales grabbed Gutierrez by both shoulders and forcefully pushed her out the front door; he then pushed Telles out and locked the door, preventing Gutierrez from retrieving the children.
- Police returned and arrested Gonzales. The State charged multiple counts including domestic battery and battery in presence of a child; after a bench trial, the court convicted Gonzales of battery as a Class B misdemeanor (lesser included of Count II) and acquitted on other counts.
- Gonzales appealed, arguing insufficiency of the evidence and asserting self-defense/defense of another.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for battery (Class B) | State: testimony showed Gonzales grabbed and forcefully pushed Gutierrez—satisfies statutory elements. | Gonzales: denied or characterized contact as defensive response to being grabbed/pushed by Gutierrez. | Affirmed. Trial testimony (Gutierrez and Telles) supports conviction. |
| Self-defense / defense of another | State: evidence shows Gonzales instigated the physical confrontation, negating self-defense. | Gonzales: claimed Gutierrez grabbed/pushed him first and he acted to protect himself/Baxter. | Held against Gonzales; State rebutted self-defense by showing he instigated the violence. |
Key Cases Cited
- Oney v. State, 993 N.E.2d 157 (Ind. 2013) (standard for reviewing bench-trial sufficiency under Trial Rule 52(A))
- Hitch v. State, 51 N.E.3d 216 (Ind. 2016) (clarifies appellate review and deference to trial court credibility findings)
- Wilson v. State, 770 N.E.2d 799 (Ind. 2002) (State must negate at least one element of self-defense when claim is supported by evidence)
- Carroll v. State, 744 N.E.2d 432 (Ind. 2001) (State may rebut self-defense by relying on its case-in-chief)
- Wilcher v. State, 771 N.E.2d 113 (Ind. Ct. App. 2002) (upholding conviction where reasonable factfinder could reject self-defense testimony)
- Dixson v. State, 22 N.E.3d 836 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (elements of non-deadly-force self-defense)
- Bailey v. State, 907 N.E.2d 1003 (Ind. 2009) (supporting battery convictions on similar evidence)
- Ball v. State, 945 N.E.2d 252 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (illustrative battery case affirming convictions on testimony of forceful contact)