MEMORANDUM DECISION
[1] China Lasha Pinkney appeals her conviction of Level 1 felony aiding, inducing, or causing rape while armed with a deadly weapon.
1
Pinkney argues the trial court abused its discretion when it admitted a knife and photographs of a knife into evidence. Because the trial court did not abuse its discretion, we affirm.
Facts and Procedural History
[2] After midnight on September 12, 2022, K.R. and her boyfriend – Marquette Lauderdale – arrived at the South Bend apartment of Lauderdales friends – Pinkney and Deccoe Tate – to spend the night. Prior to arriving, K.R. had discussed with Lauderdale that she wanted to take a shower, and Lauderdale assured her that he had confirmed with Pinkney and Tate that she would be able to shower. After K.R. and Lauderdale arrived, the group spent some time talking, and everyone but K.R. was drinking alcohol. Soon thereafter, Lauderdale left to get more marijuana, and K.R. confirmed with Pinkney that the shower was available.
[3] K.R. took her toiletries to the bathroom, shut the door, and got in the shower. A moment later, Pinkney came into the bathroom, punched K.R. in the face, and asked why K.R. “was naked in front of” Tate. (Tr. Vol. 2 at 49.) Pinkney grabbed K.R. by her hair, drug her out of the shower, through the living room, out the back of the apartment, and down a staircase that exited into an enclosed courtyard that was locked with a gate. Pinkney left K.R. at the bottom of the steps, went upstairs to the kitchen, and rustled around in a silverware drawer. K.R. yelled for help, tried to find an exit, and covered herself with an air conditioner cover that she found in the courtyard. Tate started to come down the stairs, but Pinkney reappeared at the top of the stairs with a knife and “cut him with the knife on his arm[.]” (Id. at 51.) Tate then went back into the apartment.
[4] Pinkney, who was still holding the knife, told K.R. to come back upstairs. K.R. was afraid of Pinkney, so she went back upstairs. Pinkney then told K.R. to go to the bedroom, which is where Tate was. In the bedroom, Pinkney, who was still holding the knife, told K.R. to perform oral sex on Tate. K.R. began performing oral sex, but Pinkney did not think she was doing it well enough, so she threatened K.R. with the knife and put the knife against K.R.’s throat. K.R. tried to move the knife away from her throat, and the knife cut her hand. After K.R. performed oral sex, Pinkney forced K.R to kiss Pinkney, and then Pinkney grabbed K.R.’s vagina and told Tate to have sexual intercourse with K.R. After Tate had intercourse with K.R., K.R. asked to get a drink of water and smoke a cigarette, and Pinkney and Tate allowed K.R. to leave the bedroom.
[5] K.R. quickly put on pants and a shirt, and she ran out the front door. Tate, carrying the knife, followed K.R. as she ran through streets and yards “trying to get away.” (Id. at 57.) K.R. finally saw a light on at a house, and she rang the doorbell. Matthew Moyers answered the door and called 911 to get help for K.R. About ten minutes passed before officers arrived at Moyerss house, and during that time, the 911 dispatcher was gathering information from K.R. The dispatcher asked for a description of the knife, and K.R. explained: “It was a kitchen knife, like one of the long ones that you probably cut up a watermelon with, not a long skinny one, but maybe a long ․ maybe like a Michael Myerss knife, I guess youd say.”
2
(Ex. 4 at 3:40-3:51.)
[6] At approximately 3:10 a.m. on September 12, 2022, South Bend Police Department Officer Garrett Payne arrived at Moyerss house. When Officer Payne arrived, he spoke with Moyers and K.R., who was upset and crying. K.R. reported “that she had been forced at knifepoint to perform oral sex on a females boyfriend.” (Tr. Vol. 2 at 11.) Officer Payne noticed cuts on K.R.’s hand and called for medics to evaluate K.R. The medics transported K.R. to the hospital.
[7] Officer Payne met with K.R. at the hospital to take a detailed statement. K.R. was still upset and crying. She explained that she had been “thrown downstairs by a female, brought back up at knifepoint, and then forced at knifepoint to perform oral sex on this females boyfriend.” (Id. at 12.) K.R. did not know the address of the apartment where the crime occurred, but she could describe the general location and details about the building. Officer Payne believed he knew the building, so he went to take pictures of the back stairwell and enclosed courtyard, and when he showed them to K.R., she began to cry and confirmed that was where the crime occurred. Officer Payne took photographs of injuries to K.R.’s hand and face.
[8] Officer Payne then returned to the building that K.R. had confirmed was the location of the crime. Tate exited the building with a cut that he claimed was from “some type of altercation between his girlfriend and another female.” (Id. at 17.) Police obtained a search warrant for the apartment shared by Pinkney and Tate. When police executed the search warrant, they ordered everyone to exit the apartment and even called Pinkney by name, but Pinkney did not exit the apartment. Instead, police found her “in the bedroom closet hiding under some clothes and blankets.” (Id. at 19.) Police took photographs of various areas of the apartment, including pictures of a torn shower curtain in the bathroom. Detective Katrina Dawson of South Bends Special Victims Unit noticed immediately upon entering the apartment that there was an empty knife sheath in the kitchen on the floor next to the refrigerator. Detective Dawson searched the apartment for the knife and located it on the floor in the bedroom when she pushed the mattress away from the wall. Police photographed the knife sheath and the knife where they were found.
[9] The State charged Pinkney with three crimes: Level 1 felony aiding, inducing, or causing rape when armed with a deadly weapon; Level 3 felony aiding, inducing, or causing rape;
3
and Class A misdemeanor battery resulting in bodily injury.
4
The State also filed an information alleging Pinkney was subject to sentence enhancement for being a habitual offender.
5
[10] During trial, the State offered as evidence the knife that was found on the floor in the bedroom that Pinkney shared with Tate and pictures of the knife on the bedroom floor and the knife sheath on the kitchen floor. Pinkney objected to the admission of the knife and the two photographs. She argued the State failed to prove the relevance of those three items because “K.R. did not identify the knife, and she didnt give testimony describing it.” (Tr. Vol. 2 at 167.) The State argued K.R.’s testimony that the knife used was “a big kitchen knife[,]” (id. at 168), and her description in the 911 call, which had been played for the jury, were both consistent with the knife and photographs at issue. The trial court admitted the knife and photographs into evidence. A jury found Pinkney guilty of all three crimes. Pinkney then pled guilty to being a habitual offender.
[11] Following preparation of a presentence report and a sentencing hearing, the court declined to enter a conviction of Level 3 felony aiding, inducing, or causing rape. For Pinkneys Level 1 felony conviction, the trial court entered a thirty-year sentence, which it enhanced by eight years based on the habitual offender adjudication. For Pinkneys Class A misdemeanor conviction, the trial court imposed a one-year sentence, which it ordered served concurrent with the thirty-eight-year sentence. The trial court suspended ten years of Pinkneys sentence and ordered her to spend five years on probation.
Discussion and Decision
[12] Pinkney challenges the admission into evidence of the knife and photographs of the knife and sheath found in Pinkneys apartment. The admission of evidence is trusted to the sound discretion of the trial court. Russell v. State, 234 N.E.3d 829, 858 (Ind. 2024). We reverse for an abuse of discretion, which occurs “only where the decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances.” Id. (quoting Smith v. State, 754 N.E.2d 502, 504 (Ind. 2001)).
[13] Pinkney claims the photographs and knife should not have been admitted because they were not relevant. Relevant evidence is evidence that “has any tendency to make a fact [of consequence to the action] more or less probable than it would be without the evidence[.]” Evid. Rule 401. Relevant evidence is presumptively admissible, and irrelevant evidence is inadmissible. Evid. Rule 402.
[14] Pinkney argues the evidence was irrelevant because “K.R. never was shown the knife, or any photographs of the knife[, and] she never described it in her testimony.” (Br. of Appellant at 12.) However, as the State noted at trial, K.R. described the knife in detail during her 911 call, and the recording of that 911 call was admitted into evidence and played for the jury. K.R. had described the knife used by Pinkney as a long, but not skinny, kitchen knife used for cutting watermelon, like the one used by Michael Myers.
6
The knife and photographs admitted into evidence met that description, and the testimony of Detective Dawson connected the knife and photographs to the scene of the crime. While the better practice would be to have the victim identify the weapon on the stand, the States failure to do so herein did not make the knife “irrelevant.” See Johnson v. State, 447 N.E.2d 1072, 1074 (Ind. 1983) (holding knife found with prybar used to enter unoccupied house was “relevant as being a possible weapon used in the commission of the offense”).
[15] Moreover, any error in the admission of the knife and photographs would be harmless. See App. R. 66(A) (“No error or defect in any ruling or order or in anything done or omitted by the trial court or by any of the parties is ground for granting relief or reversal on appeal where its probable impact, in light of all the evidence in the case, is sufficiently minor so as not to affect the substantial rights of the parties.”). The “probable impact test” of Appellate Rule 66 places the burden on the party challenging the evidence to demonstrate “how, in light of all the evidence in the case, the errors probable impact undermines confidence in the outcome of the proceeding below.” Hayko v. State, 211 N.E.3d 483, 492 (Ind. 2023) (quotations omitted).
[16] Pinkney cannot demonstrate that “probable impact” on the record presented. K.R. testified that Pinkney threatened her and held a knife against her throat. K.R. testified that she had a cut on her hand from trying to move the knife away from her throat, and a photograph of the cut on her hand was admitted into evidence. K.R. described the knife in detail in the 911 call she made right after running away from Pinkneys apartment. Officer Payne testified that K.R. reported to him that “she had been forced at knifepoint to perform oral sex on a females boyfriend.” (Tr. Vol. 2 at 11.) The nurse who conducted the sexual assault exam at the hospital testified K.R. reported to her that Pinkney “had a knife and ․ forced her to perform oral sex on [Tate].” (Id. at 99.) Pinkney took the stand and, although she claimed that she battered K.R. because she caught K.R. voluntarily giving oral sex to Tate, Pinkney testified she ran into the kitchen and grabbed a knife to attack Tate because he was bigger than her. Thus, the question at trial was not whether Pinkney used a knife but whether the jury believed the testimony of Pinkney or of K.R. about why sexual contact occurred between K.R. and Tate. Amidst all this testimony, the knife and photographs were unlikely to have had any impact on the jurys verdict. See, e.g., Lewis v. State, 34 N.E.3d 240, 248 (Ind. 2015) (erroneous admission of evidence that defendant “was a mean drunk” was harmless in light of the testimony of multiple witnesses about defendants behavior on night in question).
Conclusion
[17] The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it admitted the evidence that Pinkney challenges on appeal. We therefore affirm the trial courts judgment.
[18] Affirmed.
FOOTNOTES
1
. Ind. Code §§ 35-42-4-1(a)(1), 35-42-4-1(b), 35-41-2-4.
2
. Michael Myers is a fictional character from the Halloween film series who murders people with a knife that has a long blade that is pointed at the tip but wider than the handle at the heel.
3
. Ind. Code §§ 35-42-4-1(a)(1), 35-41-2-4.
4
. Ind. Code §§ 35-42-2-1(c)(1), 35-42-2-1(d)(1).
5
. Ind. Code § 35-50-2-8.
6
. See supra n.2.
May, Judge.
Judges Brown and Pyle concur.
Brown, J., and Pyle, J., concur.