Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1505-CR-389 | January 29, 2016 Page 1 of 11

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), 

this Memorandum Decision shall not be 

regarded as precedent or cited before any 

court except for the purpose of establishing 

the defense of res judicata, collateral 

estoppel, or the law of the case.

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT

Ruth Johnson

Marion County Public Defender Agency

Appellate Division

Indianapolis, Indiana

Kimberly A. Jackson

Indianapolis, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE

Gregory F. Zoeller

Attorney General of Indiana

Karl M. Scharnberg

Deputy Attorney General

Indianapolis, Indiana

I N T H E

COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Latanya T-Butler,

Appellant-Defendant,

v.

State of Indiana,

Appellee-Plaintiff.

January 29, 2016

Court of Appeals Case No.

49A02-1505-CR-389

Appeal from the 

Marion Superior Court

The Honorable 

Amy J. Barbar, Magistrate

Trial Court Cause No.

49G02-1303-FB-20098

Kirsch, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1505-CR-389 | January 29, 2016 Page 2 of 11

[1] Latanya T-Butler (“T-Butler”) was convicted after a jury trial of battery1 as a 

Class B felony, neglect of a dependent2 as a Class D felony, and battery3 as a 

Class D felony4 and was given an aggregate twelve-year sentence. T-Butler 

raises the following restated issue for our review: whether the evidence 

presented at trial was sufficient to support her convictions for Class B felony 

battery and Class D felony neglect of a dependent.

[2] We affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

[3] During the early months of 2013, Laverne Perkins (“Laverne”) had custody of 

J.P., the two-year-old son of her brother, Gerald Perkins (“Gerald”), while 

Gerald was in prison. In February and March of 2013, J.P. was living with 

Laverne and her elderly father, who was in hospice in the home. During that 

period of time, Laverne became ill with the flu. On Sunday, February 24, 2013, 

she spoke with T-Butler, who was engaged to Gerald, and T-Butler offered to 

 

1

See Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1(a)(4). 

2

See Ind. Code § 35-46-1-4(a)(1).

3

See Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1(a)(2).

4 We note that, effective July 1, 2014, new versions of these criminal statutes were enacted. Because T-Butler 

committed her crimes prior to July 1, 2014, we will apply the statutes in effect at the time she committed her 

crimes. 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1505-CR-389 | January 29, 2016 Page 3 of 11

take J.P. for three days so Laverne could recover from the flu. On the same 

date, T-Butler took J.P. into her home to care for him.

[4] On the date that T-Butler took J.P., he had no marks or injuries on his body. 

J.P. had been diagnosed with ringworm, and Laverne forgot to send his 

medication when J.P. went to T-Butler’s home. T-Butler had two other boys in 

her home, a three-year-old and an eighteen-month-old. Laverne spoke on the 

phone with T-Butler every day that J.P. was staying with T-Butler. During one 

of these calls, T-Butler told Laverne that J.P. had an accident in the bathroom, 

had taken off his pajamas, and had played “with the boo boo in the toilet, 

splashing all over the bathroom.” Tr. at 20-21. T-Butler also told Gerald about 

the incident when she spoke with him on the phone as the incident was 

occurring.5 When T-Butler first discovered what J.P. had done, she struck J.P. 

Gerald and T-Butler continued to discuss the incident and speak about how 

Laverne let J.P. get away with too much. At one point, T-Butler said that 

Laverne was “priming [J.P.] to get his ass tore up. I’m not going for none of 

that shit.” State’s Ex. 19; State’s Ex. 20 at 24. While talking with Gerald, TButler also mentioned am incident where J.P. urinated on her floor, and she 

“tried to remodel his ass.” State’s Ex. 19; State’s Ex. 20 at 5.

[5] During her conversation with Gerald, T-Butler mentioned an earlier incident 

where J.P. had told her no and told her to “shut up.” State’s Ex. 19; State’s Ex. 

 

5 Gerald was incarcerated in the Miami Correctional Facility at the time and several of his recorded phone 

calls were admitted at trial.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1505-CR-389 | January 29, 2016 Page 4 of 11

20 at 12. T-Butler hit J.P. in the mouth, causing his lips to swell noticeably. 

On Wednesday, the day when J.P. was originally supposed to go back to 

Laverne’s house, Laverne called T-Butler to inform her that she would be 

coming over to pick up J.P., but T-Butler told Laverne that J.P. was watching 

movies with her boys and that Laverne did not sound well yet. Laverne told TButler that she would bring over some more clothing for J.P., but T-Butler told 

Laverne they were not home. T-Butler said they were at McDonald’s, so 

Laverne arranged for a mutual friend to take clothes to the restaurant. 

[6] Laverne gave Juanita Chavers (“Juanita”), the mutual friend, a bag of clothing 

and J.P.’s ringworm medication and told Juanita to let T-Butler know that 

Laverne would take J.P. back at the monthly meeting of the motorcycle club, to 

which they all belonged, that was scheduled for the next Sunday. T-Butler was 

not at the McDonald’s when Juanita arrived, so Juanita proceeded to T-Butler’s 

home. When she got to the home, Juanita saw J.P., but he did not seem to be 

as energetic as usual. She also observed that his face was scratched, his lip was 

swollen, and he was crying. Juanita also noticed that J.P. would stop crying 

whenever T-Butler would look at him. Juanita thought that J.P. and the other 

boys had been in a fight, so she did not say anything.

[7] DeMetra Perkins (“DeMetra”), who is Laverne’s niece and a cousin to J.P., 

went to T-Butler’s home that same night to do T-Butler’s hair. When she saw 

J.P., she noticed that his lip was “busted,” and she asked T-Butler what 

happened to him. Tr. at 156. T-Butler explained to DeMetra that J.P. had told 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1505-CR-389 | January 29, 2016 Page 5 of 11

her no and told her to shut up, so she had “popped him” in the mouth. Id. 

DeMetra observed that J.P. was being quiet and kind of sleepy.

[8] On Sunday, March 3, 2013, at the club meeting, T-Butler brought J.P., and 

Laverne immediately noticed that J.P.’s lips were swollen and “pussy,” he had 

scratches on his face, there were open sores behind his ears, his hands were 

swollen, and his “mouth was stuck like he really couldn’t talk.” Id. at 24-25. 

When Laverne asked what had happened, T-Butler denied anything happened 

to J.P. and said she did not even notice anything wrong with him. She also 

stated that one of her boys could have hit him with a toy and later also admitted 

that she had spanked J.P. During the meeting, some people came over and 

tried to pick J.P. up, but he would start crying when they did, so Laverne tried 

to get him to sit next to her, but he only wanted to stand. 

[9] Laverne told T-Butler that something was wrong with J.P. and that Laverne 

intended to take him to the hospital. T-Butler did not want Laverne to take him 

to the hospital and, instead, suggested that Laverne take him to DeMetra’s 

mother, Dorothy, who is a nurse. Laverne did so and allowed Dorothy to look 

at J.P. When Dorothy pulled down J.P.’s pull-up diaper, she ripped off a bunch 

of scabs from J.P.’s buttocks, and his buttocks were bleeding. At that time, 

Laverne took J.P straight to the hospital. While she was on her way there, 

Laverne received several phone calls from T-Butler asking if Laverne was really 

taking J.P to the hospital. During these calls, when Laverne asked T-Butler 

who had taken care of J.P., T-Butler responded, “nobody but [me].” Id. at 35. 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1505-CR-389 | January 29, 2016 Page 6 of 11

[10] At the hospital, it was determined that J.P. had second degree burns on both of 

his buttocks, which had been caused by contact with a very hot flat object. His 

left buttock was infected, and both sides had dead skin. The burn on his right 

buttock measured eight-and-a-half centimeters by five centimeters, and the burn 

on the left side measured five centimeters by five centimeters. The burns were 

determined to be at least forty-eight hours old, but less than seven days old. 

Additionally, it was discovered that J.P. had an abrasion and bruising on his 

forehead, a superficial laceration to his lip, and bruises to his thighs. It was also 

determined that J.P. had finger-shaped bruises to his upper arms and around 

both knees. J.P. was running a fever of 102 degrees, which the doctor who 

treated J.P. stated was “a significant fever for a two year old.” Id. at 77. J.P.’s 

symptoms of listlessness, fever, and elevated white blood cell count were 

attributed to a staph infection from the burns on his buttocks. 

[11] J.P. was admitted into the hospital and stayed for a week. He received I.V.

fluids and antibiotics and was treated for sepsis, which is the body’s response to 

a severe infection where oxidants are released into the bloodstream in large 

quantities. Id. at 118. These oxidants are toxic, and sepsis can be fatal. The 

burns to J.P.’s buttocks were determined to be the source of the sepsis. A hot 

plate consistent with the burns found on J.P.’s buttocks was found in T-Butler’s 

house.

[12] On March 26, 2013, the State charged T-Butler with battery as a Class B felony, 

neglect of a dependent as a Class B felony, and battery as a Class D felony. A 

jury trial was held on March 30 and 31, 2015. At trial, T-Butler’s defense was 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1505-CR-389 | January 29, 2016 Page 7 of 11

that J.P.’s injuries were caused because he contracted an extremely rare 

disorder called Stevens-Johnson Syndrome as a side effect of his ringworm 

medication. However, Dr. Clinton Cavett (“Dr. Cavett”), the doctor who 

treated J.P., ruled out Stevens-Johnson Syndrome because it shows up all over 

the body and resists treatment. J.P.’s symptoms were localized to his buttocks, 

and responded immediately to antibiotics. Tr. at 106-08, 114. At the 

conclusion of the trial, the jury found T-Butler guilty of all three counts. On 

May 8, 2014, a sentencing hearing was held, and the trial court amended the 

Class B felony neglect of a dependent conviction to a Class D felony. The trial 

court sentenced T-Butler to twelve years for her Class B felony battery 

conviction with ten years executed and two years suspended to probation to run 

concurrent with a two-year-sentence for her Class D felony neglect of a 

dependent conviction, but consecutive to a two-year-sentence for her Class D 

felony battery conviction, which resulted in an aggregate sentence of twelve 

years executed. T-Butler now appeals.

Discussion and Decision

[13] The deferential standard of review for sufficiency claims is well settled. When 

we review the sufficiency of evidence to support a conviction, we do not 

reweigh the evidence or assess the credibility of the witnesses. Boggs v. State, 

928 N.E.2d 855, 864 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010), trans. denied. We consider only the 

evidence most favorable to the verdict and the reasonable inferences that can be 

drawn from this evidence. Fuentes v. State, 10 N.E.3d 68, 75 (Ind. Ct. App. 

2014), trans. denied. We will not disturb the jury’s verdict if there is substantial 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1505-CR-389 | January 29, 2016 Page 8 of 11

evidence of probative value to support it. Id. A conviction may be based upon 

circumstantial evidence alone. Boggs, 928 N.E.2d at 864. We will affirm unless 

no reasonable fact-finder could find the elements of the crime proven beyond a 

reasonable doubt. Tooley v. State, 911 N.E.2d 721, 724-25 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009), 

trans. denied. As the reviewing court, we respect “the jury’s exclusive province 

to weigh conflicting evidence.” McHenry v. State, 820 N.E.2d 124, 126 (Ind. 

2005). 

[14] T-Butler argues that the State failed to present sufficient evidence to support her 

convictions for battery as a Class B felony and neglect of a dependent as a Class 

D felony. As to the battery conviction, she specifically contends that 

insufficient evidence was presented to prove that she was responsible for any 

serious injury to J.P’s buttocks because all of J.P.’s injuries were consistent with 

the side effects of the ringworm medication he was taking. As to the neglect of 

a dependent conviction, T-Butler asserts that the State failed to prove beyond a 

reasonable doubt that she knowingly placed J.P. in a situation that endangered 

his life or health because insufficient evidence was presented to show she was 

responsible for J.P.’s injury to his buttocks or that she failed to obtain medical 

treatment for him.

[15] In order to convict T-Butler of Class B felony battery, the State was required to 

prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she was at least eighteen years of age and 

knowingly or intentionally touched J.P., who was less than fourteen years old, 

in a rude, insolent, or angry manner resulting in serious bodily injury to J.P. 

Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1(a)(4). In the charging information, the State specifically 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1505-CR-389 | January 29, 2016 Page 9 of 11

alleged that T-Butler struck or burned J.P., which caused “serious permanent 

disfigurement and/or extreme pain” to J.P. Appellant’s App. at 21. 

[16] In the present case, the evidence showed that, when J.P. was brought to the 

hospital on March 3, 2013, he was suffering from second degree burns on both 

of his buttocks, which had been caused by contact with a very hot flat object. 

Prior to that date, J.P. had been staying with T-Butler in her home continuously

for seven days. During that period of time, he was only at T-Butler’s home and 

in her care. Evidence was also presented that, at the time that J.P. was placed 

in T-Butler’s care, he did not have any injuries, but that the injuries were 

present when he was returned to Laverne’s care. The State presented evidence 

that a hot plate consistent with the burns on J.P.’s buttocks was found in TButler’s home. Dr. Cavett confirmed that the burns on J.P.’s body could have 

been inflicted with the hot plate. Tr. at 111. T-Butler’s arguments that J.P.’s 

injuries were caused by an adverse reaction to his ringworm medication are a 

request for this court to reweigh the evidence, which we cannot do on appeal. 

Boggs, 928 N.E.2d at 864. She presented this defense theory at trial, and the 

jury clearly disregarded it and found her guilty of the crime. Viewing the 

evidence in a light most favorable to the verdict, as our standard of review 

dictates, we conclude that sufficient evidence was presented to support TButler’s conviction for Class B felony battery. 

[17] In order to convict T-Butler of Class D felony neglect of a dependent, the State 

was required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she, having the care of 

J.P., knowingly or intentionally placed J.P. in a situation that endangered his 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1505-CR-389 | January 29, 2016 Page 10 of 11

life or health. Ind. Code § 35-46-1-4(a)(1). Specifically, the State alleged in the 

charging information that T-Butler placed J.P. in a situation that endangered 

his life or health when she “failed to seek medical attention for [J.P.] after . . . 

T-Butler did observe that [J.P.] was injured and/or . . . T-Butler did injure

[J.P.]” Appellant’s App. at 21-22. 

[18] Initially, T-Butler again raises the argument that she did not cause J.P.’s injuries 

because they resulted from an adverse reaction to his medication. As we stated 

above, this is merely an invitation for this court to reweigh the evidence, which 

we do not do. Boggs, 928 N.E.2d at 864. The evidence presented at trial 

showed that the burns to J.P.’s buttocks were inflicted by T-Butler, probably 

using the hotplate on his bare buttocks, and not by an adverse reaction to his 

medication. Based on the evidence most favorable to the verdict that T-Butler 

inflicted the injuries to J.P., she was, therefore, aware that the injuries existed 

and knew the nature of the injuries. Moreover, the evidence established that 

she did not seek medical attention for J.P. by taking him to the doctor or 

hospital. In fact, when Laverne discovered the injuries upon J.P.’s return to her 

care and informed T-Butler that she was taking J.P. to the hospital, T-Butler 

attempted to stop her from doing so. At trial, evidence was presented that TButler tried to convince Laverne not to take J.P. to the hospital because TButler feared that the Department of Child Services would then become 

involved in her life. Tr. at 28, 210. T-Butler, therefore, not only failed to seek 

medical care for J.P. and for the injuries she inflicted on him, but she also 

attempted to impede others from obtaining medical attention for J.P. We 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 49A02-1505-CR-389 | January 29, 2016 Page 11 of 11

conclude that sufficient evidence was presented to support T-Butler’s conviction 

for Class D felony neglect of a dependent. 

[19] Affirmed.

Mathias, J., and Brown, J., concur.