Steven Cunninghom v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.), 49A02-1703-CR-419

On Sept. 3, 2016 Steven Cunningham came to the yard of Doskieanna Howard and her fiancé Daniel Gary, shouted Howard’s name, and behaved belligerently; bystanders believed he was intoxicated and he had a vodka bottle in his pocket.
Cunningham threw a small rock at Howard, threatened to throw a rock through the house window, and repeatedly refused verbal commands to leave the property.
Officer Ivanov arrived, observed signs of intoxication (odor of alcohol, glassy/bloodshot eyes), and detained Cunningham after Cunningham yelled profanities.
Cunningham was charged with Class A misdemeanor criminal trespass and Class B misdemeanor public intoxication; he was convicted after a bench trial and sentenced to concurrent 14-day jail terms.
On appeal Cunningham contested sufficiency of the evidence for both convictions and argued the trespass charging information misstated the property owner (it named Howard, though Gary owned the house).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Cunningham)	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for criminal trespass	Evidence showed Cunningham had no contractual interest, Howard (who lived there) asked him to leave, and he refused	Charging info incorrectly named Howard as property owner; thus elements not met	Affirmed: ownership not required; possessory interest (as long-term resident/fiancé) suffices and testimony showed repeated requests to leave and refusal
Sufficiency of evidence for public intoxication (harass/annoy/alarm element)	Cunningham was publicly intoxicated and his conduct (ranting, throwing a rock, threats) would annoy or alarm a reasonable person	Parties frequently argued; Howard was not necessarily harassed/annoyed or alarmed by Cunningham	Affirmed: objective reasonable-person standard met given yelling, threats, and rock-throwing

Binkley v. State, 654 N.E.2d 736 (Ind. 1995) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
Drane v. State, 867 N.E.2d 144 (Ind. 2007) (appellate review does not reweigh evidence or judge credibility)
Walls v. State, 993 N.E.2d 262 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (tenant/occupant possessory interest can support trespass charge)
Johnson v. State, 38 N.E.3d 686 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (residents may have authority to request others leave common areas)
Morgan v. State, 22 N.E.3d 570 (Ind. 2014) (harassing/annoying analyzed by objective reasonable-person standard)
Naas v. State, 993 N.E.2d 1151 (Ind. Ct. App. 2013) (facts supporting inference that reasonable person would be disturbed by defendant’s conduct)
Olsen v. State, 663 N.E.2d 1194 (Ind. Ct. App. 1996) (repeated requests to leave and refusal support criminal trespass conviction)