Vaidik, Chief Judge.

Case Summary

[1] Juventino Vargas-Rodriguez appeals his conviction for murder. Ricardo

Ramirez shot and killed Jorge Garcia, and Vargas-Rodriguez was convicted of murder as an accomplice. On appeal, he concedes that he is responsible for Garcia’s death, but he contends that the evidence is insufficient to support a murder conviction because the State did not prove that he intended for Garcia to be killed or that he knew that Garcia would be killed. Instead, Vargas- Rodriguez argues that he should be convicted only of reckless homicide. Finding sufficient evidence, we affirm his conviction for murder.

Facts and Procedural History Around 3:00 a.m. on September 6, 2015, Garcia and his friends left a club in

South Bend. Vargas-Rodriguez was at the same club. As Garcia walked out, he and Vargas-Rodriguez got into an argument. With encouragement from friends, Garcia walked away in hopes of continuing his birthday celebration. Garcia left in a gray truck being driven by his friend. They followed more friends to a house party. Vargas-Rodriguez then left the club to go get his white Chevrolet Impala to “ride around and drink” with his friend, Luis Gonzalez. Tr. Vol. I p. 167. Later, Vargas-Rodriguez, while driving around, encountered the truck Garcia

was in. Vargas-Rodriguez and Gonzalez felt the truck was “trying to drive [them] off the road.” . at 168. Eventually, Vargas-Rodriguez eluded the truck *3 and picked up two more friends, Manuel Vargas and Ricardo Ramirez, who suggested that they “go find them” and “see if they want to fight.” . at 169- 70. Vargas-Rodriguez began searching for the truck with Gonzalez as the front- seat passenger, Vargas as the right rear passenger, and Ramirez as the left rear passenger. After Vargas-Rodriguez found the truck, he began chasing it southbound on

Harris Street. While on Harris Street, Ramirez fired at least nine shots at the truck within three to four seconds. Most shots struck the back of the truck. The truck turned west on Sample Street, and Vargas-Rodriguez continued to chase it at seventy miles per hour. Ramirez announced that he found more bullets in his pocket and loaded two into his gun. See Tr. Vol. II pp. 74-75. The truck turned north on Olive Street, and Vargas-Rodriguez followed. Vargas- Rodriguez pulled up “side by side” to the cab of the truck, and Ramirez fired two more shots. Id. at 65. One bullet entered the driver’s door, and the other struck Garcia in the head. Vargas-Rodriguez then proceeded ahead and pulled over on the side of the road. He and his friends threw Corona bottles at the truck as it passed. Garcia was taken to the hospital, where he later died from the gunshot wound

to his head. The State charged Vargas-Rodriguez with murder as an accomplice to Ramirez. ^[1] A jury trial was held. The jury was instructed on *4 murder and reckless homicide; it found Vargas-Rodriguez guilty of murder. The trial court sentenced Vargas-Rodriguez to fifty years in the Indiana Department of Correction.

[6] Vargas-Rodriguez now appeals.

Discussion and Decision Vargas-Rodriguez contends that the evidence is insufficient to support his

conviction for murder. He concedes that the evidence is “sufficient to convict him under accomplice liability for his involvement in the death of Jorge Garcia”; however, he “disputes that the State proved that the crime committed was Murder.” Appellant’s Br. p. 13. Rather, he claims that the evidence only supports a finding of reckless homicide. When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction,

appellate courts must consider only the probative evidence and reasonable inferences supporting the verdict. Sallee v. State , 51 N.E.3d 130, 133 (Ind. 2016). It is the fact-finder’s role, not that of appellate courts, to assess witness credibility and weigh the evidence to determine whether it is sufficient to support a conviction. Drane v. State , 867 N.E.2d 144, 146 (Ind. 2007). To preserve this structure, when appellate courts are confronted with conflicting evidence, we must consider the evidence most favorable to the trial court’s ruling. . The evidence is sufficient if an inference may reasonably be drawn from it to support the verdict. Id. at 147. Murder occurs when a person “knowingly or intentionally kills another human

being.” Ind. Code § 35-42-1-1(1). “A person engages in conduct ‘knowingly’ if, when he engages in the conduct, he is aware of a high probability that he is doing so.” Ind. Code § 35-41-2-2(b). Here, Vargas-Rodriguez knew that Ramirez had a gun when he turned west on Sample Street because of the volley of shots fired into the back of the truck on Harris Street. Vargas-Rodriguez continued to chase the truck at seventy miles per hour. Ramirez announced that he found more bullets as he reloaded his gun, and Vargas-Rodriguez knew that there was a high probability that Ramirez could kill someone when he pulled his car next to the truck on Olive Street. Therefore, the evidence presented at trial was sufficient for a reasonable jury to conclude that Vargas- Rodriguez committed murder when he chased the truck, pulled up next to it, and aided Ramirez to make his final two shots. Affirmed.

Bailey, J., and Robb, J., concur.

[1] Ramirez was also charged with murder and is currently awaiting trial.