*1 hоld is We therefore injunction temporary prima obtain a establishment stating authorizing relief, facie case facts such appellee-drug did this case. store reach unnecessary the result we herein it Under presented by to discuss cross-error us appears there has been no abuse discretion It granting interlocutory ap- trial court in order case, pealed from in thereon af- firmed.
J., concurs
result.
Reported in
Adams v. State of Indiana. Rehearing August 25, Filed June [No. 169-S-8. denied 1969.] *2 Crowell, Wayne, A. for Crowell, Bowman and Fort Jerrald Biddle, Sendak, Attorney General, James Theodore L. F. General, Deputy Attоrney for charged crime appellant was J . The with
Arterburn, robbery. guilty ac- was found rendered She cordingly. appeal trial the decision contends contrary evidence and is
court is sustained must to In a this we law. determination sustaining tо view favorable judgment, namely, favor court’s E. 67, 245 N. v. State the state. Stock 235 2d 250 N. E. State Ind. 2d Coach 2d 10. (1962), 243 E. Ind. Ponos v. Ray November about Moore testified that on through driving City Wayne, a.m., of Fort he was 1:30 to he confused as his location Indiana, became when standing of two women stopped to ask directions corner a request directions, taller response his to there. engaged if he like “trick”. While asked would woman, other woman entered taller conversation body. right held knife to side and the car woman, who was later found to the taller Moore testified the knife How- Hall, not awarе that was there. be Gloria and told Moore drive the car to ever, also entered reaching Upon corner Moore corner, this he did. to a light and to drive to another too it was still was told that spot. he the car dark Mоore testified that drove directed . . I “. because was scared that she was this stick knife me I didn’t mind robbed but didn’t want bodily them to harm me.”
After Moore and women had reached the second spot, appellant dark the woman later idеntified as the pockets the knife on him and rifled while his Mrs. Hall went his brief case in back seat. The then push grabbed started hе at which time arm and hit her. At time Hall Mrs. realized knife, help had and tried grabbing shirt collar in keep his him in finally getting the car. Moore succeeded in out of the car run, police and had when a started turned the corner. policemen Moore informed the he had been robbed and they proceeded after the women. After a short chase Mrs. apprehended, escaped. Hall but the other woman viewing *3 night, Later same photographs after pоlice department, Moore identified the other woman as the He identified in a and in court as the appel- woman the knife. testified that the twenty-three ($23.00) lant took dollars from him and that were taken. his credit cards Mrs. Hall admitted thе taller of the two women who girl girl confronted but the shorter claims was a named agreed Laura or Lana. further tеstified that Laura $10.00, an to commit unnatural sex with Mr. act Moore for process doing which she was in the when Moore bеcame excited, gave second ten dollar bill and told her to get testimony concerning out of the car. Mrs. Hаll’s “Laura” supported by was another witness. argues allegations
The that the material supported by evidence, are affidavit and cites sup- Easton 2d 6 in port position. Easton of her do not believe the We case is burglary,
аpplicable charge yet the evi- here. The there was attempted clearly took or showed the defendant dence merely nothing apartment, but was watch- to take The in that case ing discovered. television when guilt opportunity suspicion or “a showed at felony.” commit robbery allegations are the crime set material The 10-4101, as: Burns’ out in §
“1) takes Whoever person “2) another from any
“3) of value article guilty of putting in rob- “4). fear violence bery .. .” later iden- that a who was here shows ($23.00) twenty-three dollars took
tified as holding a knife at his side: from Moore (Moore) you “Q. have the events course of got point first described, at which you, up knife and credit cards on stuck money point which the your person, during you if I will ask taken wеre you in fear? events were course those girls they yes, I Very definitely, could “A. indicated put my money I was don’t but me. have plunge a knife the shorter afraid my money them, me but me. ‘Take let told ” go.’ testimony picture, corroborated Stаte’s One, which showed scars ab- Exhibit Number small domen Moore. alleges further that Moore’s is so appellant by him
inconsistent *4 agree. this contention we can not is insufficient. With the the as knife positively identified Delores Adams mug book, lineup, separate three times —from the room. and while in the court identity question not of law. one fact and the “The Thereforе upon bearing must be jury jury, the. submitted it satisfactory it ánd trust determine whether worthy. (Citing cases).” (1946), Medsker v. State
224
246
246 Ind.
70 N.
Barnes v. State
Ind.
Ind.
E. 2d
Greenwаlt v. State
2dE.
For the we hold that there is sufficient support verdict, the trial court should be affirmed. J., Jackson, opinion. dissents with Opinion.
Dissenting purpose of I deem J . For it this dissent question: to ask where in the record is probative there value to be found the substantial evidence to sustain the trial court? Reported in 248 E. 2d 551.