William S. Smith v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.), 49A02-1603-CR-656

Victim Azya Knowles dated William S. Smith; her brother brought her a .22-caliber handgun to Smith’s house on Feb. 10, 2015.
On Feb. 11, Smith was observed driving a pickup with a damaged windshield and shattered passenger window in Haughville; later he drove to the City-County Building carrying a .380 handgun and claiming people had shot at him.
Police found Knowles on the passenger floorboard of Smith’s truck; she had three fatal .22-caliber gunshot wounds to the head and later died.
Investigators recovered two .22-caliber shell casings from inside the truck (fired from the same weapon), but no .22 firearm; Smith’s .380 handgun and a .380 shell casing were found in the truck, plus $30,000 cash and marijuana.
Smith told officers he didn’t shoot her and claimed others from Haughville shot at them; forensic testing indicated some windshield impacts were consistent with bullets fired from inside the truck.
Smith was tried (pro se), convicted by a jury of murder, carrying a handgun without a license, and marijuana possession, and he appealed arguing insufficient evidence he was the shooter.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence that Smith murdered Knowles	State: circumstantial evidence and inferences (shell casings, bullets, victim in passenger floorboard, windshield impacts, Smith’s statements and conduct) support conviction	Smith: State failed to prove he had access to or fired a .22; no .22 gun produced; conviction rests on speculation	Affirmed: a reasonable jury could infer Smith shot Knowles beyond a reasonable doubt

Wilson v. State, 39 N.E.3d 705 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (standard for sufficiency review and use of circumstantial evidence)
Hughes v. State, 546 N.E.2d 1203 (Ind. 1989) (evidence of attempts to conceal or manufacture exculpatory evidence may show consciousness of guilt)