Case Title: Victor Roar v. State of Indiana

Citation: 

Docket Number: 49S02-1607-CR-372

State: indiana

Court: Indiana Supreme Court

Date: 2016-07-12T00:00:00Z

Document:
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT 
 
 
 
 
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE 
Ruth Ann Johnson 
 
 
 
 
 
Gregory F. Zoeller 
Valerie K. Boots  
 
 
 
 
 
Attorney General of Indiana 
Marion County Public Defender Agency 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Indianapolis, Indiana 
 
  
 
 
 
James B. Martin 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Deputy Attorney General 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Indianapolis, Indiana 
 
 
 
______________________________________________________________________________ 
 
 
In the 
Indiana Supreme Court  
_________________________________ 
 
No. 49S02-1607-CR-372 
 
VICTOR ROAR,  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Appellant (Defendant below), 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    v. 
 
STATE OF INDIANA,    
 
 
 
 
 
Appellee (Plaintiff below).  
 
 
_________________________________ 
 
Appeal from the Marion Superior Court, No. 49F09-1404-FD-18644  
The Honorable Barbara Cook Crawford, Judge 
_________________________________ 
 
On Petition to Transfer from the Indiana Court of Appeals, No. 49A02-1506-CR-506 
_________________________________ 
 
July 12, 2016 
 
Per Curiam. 
 
Victor Roar was convicted of class A misdemeanor intimidation after the property manager 
of his sister’s apartment left an eviction notice on his sister’s door, and Roar told the property 
manager, “if [the property manager] came back on the property, he’d kill [her].”   
 
FILED
C L E R K
Indiana Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
and Tax Court
Jul 12 2016, 10:42 am
 
2 
 
 
Roar contended the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction.  Specifically, he 
argued that his statement was conditional, and not a threat to retaliate for a prior lawful act, because 
the statement concerned future, rather than past, conduct (namely, the manager coming “back on 
the property” in the future).  Rejecting its prior precedent in C.L. v. State, 2 N.E.3d 798 (Ind. Ct. 
App. 2014), the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court.  See Roar v. State, ___ N.E.3d ___, 2016 
WL 1593880, at *2 (Ind. Ct. App. April 21, 2016).  The majority concluded that the State had 
presented sufficient evidence that Roar’s threat was made “with the intent . . . that [the manager] 
be placed in fear of retaliation for a prior lawful act” as required by the intimidation statute, Indiana 
Code section 35-45-2-1(a).  Id. at *2.  
 
We agree with Judge Najam’s analysis and the result reached by the Court of Appeals 
majority in the present appeal.  We therefore grant transfer, adopt and incorporate by reference 
that portion of the Court of Appeals’ opinion addressing the sufficiency of the evidence in 
accordance with Indiana Appellate Rule 58(A)(1), and affirm the trial court.  We summarily affirm 
that part of the Court of Appeals’ opinion addressing the admission of other evidence.  See App. 
R. 58(A)(2). 
 
All Justices concur.