160 Ind. App. 409 | Ind. Ct. App. | 1974
— Defendant-appellant, James Edward Shropshire, was convicted of assault with intent to kill following a bench trial. The sole issue which Shropshire seeks to present upon appeal is with reference to the accuracy of the identification of him as the perpetrator of the offense.
Police Officer Watford and his partner, Officer Larkins, were on duty in their vehicle on the night of January 30, 1973. Officer Watford knew the Shropshire family. They
At trial, both Officers Larkins and Watford positively identified James Edward Shropshire as the man who was in Crowe’s car and who fired the shots at them.
Appellant’s position is centered upon the testimony by Crowe that his passenger was Jerry Shropshire not James Edward (Eddie) Shropshire and upon the fact that Officer Watford’s initial report of the incident identified the person who fired the shots as Jerry, as well as upon Mrs. Shropshire’s testimony to the effect that Officer Watford inquired of her immediately following the shooting as to the whereabouts of Jerry rather than of Eddie. Watford explained the use of Jerry’s name upon his initial report by stating that he was confused as to whether James Edward or Jerry was known as “Eddie”. He further testified without objection that Shropshire’s mother told him that it was Eddie who had just left the house and got into Crowe’s car. As noted, the testimony of Mrs. Shropshire at trial was contrary.
Appellant concludes that the identification evidence was too uncertain to support his conviction.
We reject this conclusion. The trial court, as was its prerogative, believed the testimony of Officers Larkins and Watford as opposed to the testimony of the defendant’s
The judgment is affirmed.
Buchanan and White, JJ., concur.
Note. — Reported at 312. N.E.2d 146.