Shemata Chatman v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)
49A02-1705-CR-1148
| Ind. Ct. App. | Oct 26, 2017Background
- On Aug. 9, 2016, Shemata Chatman entered the IndyGo Transit Center lobby and became loud and disruptive after saying she’d lost her purse.
- Security officer David Howe (a contracted officer) and Transportation Supervisor Carl Pickens attempted to calm her and obtain details about the lost property; Chatman gave inconsistent information about the bus/route and would not provide a specific time or route.
- Officer Howe explained the lost-and-found procedure and told Chatman she could return the next morning; Chatman continued yelling, refused to leave, and threw herself on the ground.
- Howe told Chatman three times to leave and warned she would be arrested for criminal trespass if she did not; she said she would not leave and was arrested.
- Chatman was charged with and convicted at a bench trial of criminal trespass (Class A misdemeanor) and sentenced to 365 days (361 suspended) plus community service.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence was sufficient to support conviction for criminal trespass (no contractual interest and refusal to leave after being asked) | State: testimony showed Chatman disrupted operations, was warned to leave, refused, and thus committed trespass | Chatman: she had a contractual interest as a passenger and to access the lost-and-found, so she had a right to be on premises | Court affirmed: reasonable factfinder could find no contractual interest and that she knowingly/intentionally refused to leave |
Key Cases Cited
- Drane v. State, 867 N.E.2d 144 (Ind. 2007) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence on appeal)
- Jenkins v. State, 726 N.E.2d 268 (Ind. 2000) (evidence viewed most favorably to the verdict; credibility not reweighed)
- Lyles v. State, 970 N.E.2d 140 (Ind. 2012) (definition and proof of lack of "contractual interest" in property)
- Taylor v. State, 836 N.E.2d 1024 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (refusal to leave after repeated warnings supports criminal trespass conviction)
- A.E.B. v. State, 756 N.E.2d 536 (Ind. Ct. App. 2001) (disruption and refusal to leave school property supported trespass conviction)