MEMORANDUM DECISION
Case Summary
[1] Michael Davis was convicted of level 5 felony carrying a handgun without a license and level 6 felony neglect of a dependent. On appeal, Davis challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his neglect conviction. Finding the evidence sufficient, we affirm.
Facts and Procedural History
[2] The facts most favorable to Daviss convictions are as follows. Around 10:00 p.m. on October 4, 2020, Davis, his girlfriend Ashantia Clark, and their four-month-old son M.D. visited the apartment of Daviss sister, Tatianna, to celebrate her daughters birthday. Tatiannas boyfriend, Jalen White, was also there. White and Davis had been longtime friends, but approximately three weeks earlier, they had a dispute during which Davis pulled a gun on White and told him that if he “came close, he would ․ kill [him].” Tr. Vol. 3 at 152. Davis, Tatianna, and White had been drinking alcohol, and they got into an argument about Daviss older brother not approving of Tatianna and Whites relationship. Tatianna told everyone to leave. No one left, and the argument subsided.
[3] At some point, Davis, Clark, and M.D. were in a bedroom with White. The room was roughly ten feet by ten feet. Clark and M.D. were lying on the bed, and White was sitting on the bed. Davis was “pacing.” Id. at 155. The argument flared up again between Davis and White. Tatianna came into the bedroom and again told everyone to leave. White got up to leave and “wrestle[d] a little bit” with Tatianna. Id. at 156. Davis intervened and got into a “tussle” with White. Id. Tatianna broke up that skirmish and yet again told everyone to leave. White turned his back on Davis to get his keys and cigarettes from a TV stand. Davis pulled out a handgun and fired twice. One bullet struck White in the shoulder and spine, paralyzing him from the chest down, and the other struck his leg, breaking his femur. White fell to the floor, and Tatianna ran to call 911. Davis “just walked out of the room and said ․ you all do too much.” Id. at 159.
[4] Police officers arrived and took Davis into custody. One spent shell casing was found on the floor next to the bed on which Clark and M.D. had been lying. A second spent shell casing and a Glock 9-millimeter semiautomatic handgun were found on the bed itself. The handguns magazine had a fourteen-round capacity, and twelve rounds were in the magazine. It was determined that the two spent shell casings were fired from the Glock handgun. No additional weapons were found in the apartment.
[5] The State charged Davis with level 3 felony aggravated battery, class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license (elevated to a level 5 felony due to a prior conviction for the same offense), and level 6 felony neglect of a dependent. The neglect charge alleged that Davis, “having the care of M.D., a dependent, did knowingly place said dependent in a situation that endangered the dependents life or health, to-wit: firing a gunshot in close proximity to the child while engaged in a fight[.]” Appellants App. Vol. 2 at 50.
[6] A jury trial was held in July 2023. Clark was called as a defense witness and testified that White was known to carry a gun, that he had a gun on the night of the shooting, and that he was moving toward the TV stand to retrieve it when Davis shot him. Clark also testified that Tatianna moved Whites gun before the police arrived. Both White and Tatianna denied that White had a gun that night. White testified, “I guess [Davis] assumed I was going for a gun and shot me in the back.” Tr. Vol. 3 at 156. Daviss counsel argued that Davis acted in defense of himself and his girlfriend and child, and the jury was given an instruction on that defense. The jury acquitted Davis of aggravated battery and found him guilty of class A misdemeanor carrying a handgun without a license and neglect. The trial court found that Davis had a prior handgun conviction, entered judgments of conviction for level 5 felony carrying a handgun without a license and level 6 felony neglect, and imposed a three-year aggregate sentence. This appeal ensued.
Discussion and Decision
[7] Davis challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his neglect conviction. In reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we neither reweigh the evidence nor judge the credibility of witnesses. Anderson v. State, 37 N.E.3d 972, 973 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015), trans. denied. We view all evidence and reasonable inferences drawn therefrom in a light most favorable to the conviction. Walker v. State, 998 N.E.2d 724, 726 (Ind. 2013). On appeal, it is not necessary that the evidence overcome every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. Gray v. State, 957 N.E.2d 171, 174 (Ind. 2011). We must affirm if the evidence and the reasonable inferences drawn therefrom could have allowed a reasonable trier of fact to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Anderson, 37 N.E.3d at 974.
[8] Indiana Code Section 35-46-1-4(a) provides in pertinent part that “[a] person having the care of a dependent, whether assumed voluntarily or because of a legal obligation, who knowingly ․ places the dependent in a situation that endangers the dependents life or health” commits level 6 felony neglect of a dependent. “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). “The fact finder is entitled to infer intent from the surrounding circumstances.” Lee v. State, 973 N.E.2d 1207, 1210 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012), trans. denied.
[9] Here, the facts most favorable to the conviction establish that Davis, who had been drinking alcohol and was fighting with White in a ten-by-ten bedroom, fired two shots from a fully loaded semiautomatic handgun at White, who Davis believed was reaching for his own handgun. One of the spent shell casings landed next to the bed on which four-month-old M.D. was lying, and the other landed on the bed itself. Under these circumstances, a reasonable trier of fact could find beyond a reasonable doubt that Davis was aware of a high probability that he was placing M.D. in a situation that endangered his life or health. See Street v. State, 30 N.E.3d 41, 50 (Ind. Ct. App. 2015) (affirming neglect conviction where defendant “had a loaded firearm inside a pillow case on the bed” where two-year-old child slept), trans. denied. Daviss assertion to the contrary is simply an invitation to reweigh the evidence in his favor, which we must decline. Therefore, we affirm.
1
[10] Affirmed.
FOOTNOTES
1
. Davis suggests that his acquittal on the aggravated battery charge necessarily indicates that the jury believed that he acted in defense of himself and others, and thus his neglect conviction cannot stand. We agree with the State that “[t]his is an improper attempt to invalidate a conviction on one count based on an acquittal [o]n another count” and that “the acquittal does not implicate the sufficiency standard for the neglect conviction.” Appellees Br. at 9. See Beattie v. State, 924 N.E.2d 643, 646-48 (Ind. 2010) (observing that juries may acquit for any number of reasons and reaffirming principle that acquittal on one count cannot vitiate guilty verdict on another).
Crone, Judge.
Bailey, J., and Pyle, J., concur.