Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-CR-1133 | October 23, 2020 Page 1 of 6

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.

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT

Sean P. Hilgendorf

South Bend, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE

Curtis T. Hill, Jr.

Attorney General of Indiana

Evan Matthew Comer

Deputy Attorney General

Indianapolis, Indiana

I N T H E

COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Jeremiah Lamar Ware,

Appellant-Defendant,

v.

State of Indiana,

Appellee-Plaintiff

October 23, 2020

Court of Appeals Case No.

20A-CR-1133

Appeal from the St. Joseph 

Superior Court

The Honorable Jane Woodward 

Miller, Judge

Trial Court Cause No.

71D01-1901-F1-3

Weissmann, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-CR-1133 | October 23, 2020 Page 2 of 6

[1] The trial court convicted Jeremiah Ware of Level 1 Felony Attempted Murder 

after a bench trial.1 Ware now appeals, arguing that his conviction was based 

on insufficient evidence to prove he fired a weapon and that if he did, that he 

fired with the intent to kill. Finding no error, we affirm.

Facts

[2] On January 14, 2019, Chaelice Abdulla and Tuesdae Stenson were hanging out 

at Stenson’s home on Cushing Street in South Bend. At some point, Stenson 

became involved in a fight on social media with Symone Berry. Berry then 

showed up outside Stenson’s place driving a red Dodge Avenger. Kanija 

Taylor was in the front passenger seat. Tyreik Williams was sitting behind 

Berry, and Jeremiah Ware was sitting behind Taylor. Both Taylor and Berry 

got out of the car. Berry and Stenson continued to argue. Abdulla watched 

from the window in Stenson’s living room. Surveillance footage taken from the 

house across the street shows a figure in the window, presumably Abdulla, 

messing with the blinds. State’s Ex. 1.

[3] Shots were fired upon Stenson’s home. The surveillance footage shows a man 

sliding out of the rear driver’s side window where Williams sat and firing at 

Stenson’s residence. Id. Taylor testified that she also heard shots fired from the 

rear inside the car, where Ware sat. Tr. Vol. II p. 111-12. Another witness 

testified to seeing gunfire emerge from the passenger side of the car. Id. at 193.

1

Ind. Code §§ 35-42-1-1; 35-41-5-1; 35-41-2-4.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-CR-1133 | October 23, 2020 Page 3 of 6

A nearby sensor recorded fourteen shots, twelve of which were later connected 

to Williams’ handgun. Two shots were fired from an unknown gun. One of the 

bullets traced to the gun fired by Williams hit Abdulla, puncturing her lung and 

hitting her spine.

[4] After the shooting stopped, Berry drove away. Taylor turned to the backseat 

and saw two guns — one handgun in Williams’ lap and one long gun resting in 

the middle of the backseat. She testified that she called the two men “dumb” 

and Ware told her not to say anything about the incident. Id. at 127-28.

[5] Police arrived shortly after the shooting ended. Upon entering Stenson’s home, 

they found Abdulla unresponsive on the living room floor. Abdulla survived, 

but she can no longer walk and uses a wheelchair. Police recovered four 

projectiles from the living room and twelve bullet casings in the street directly in 

front of Stenson’s home. One bullet was also recovered from Abdulla’s body.

[6] The next day, police stopped Berry’s red Dodge Avenger. She, Ware, and 

Williams were in the car. Berry was driving, Ware was in the front passenger 

seat, and Williams was in the back. The police took Berry, Ware, and Williams

into custody. Upon searching the car, police recovered a Smith & Wesson 

handgun in the backseat containing Williams’ fingerprints. There was no 

physical evidence that Ware had ever handled that gun. Police also found two 

9mm shell casings in the back seat. According to the Firearm and Toolmark 

Examiner at the South Bend Police Department Crime Lab, these casings were 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-CR-1133 | October 23, 2020 Page 4 of 6

not fired from the Smith & Wesson. The Smith & Wesson did fire the bullet 

that struck Abdulla and the casings found in the street. Id. at 219-22.

[7] On January 18, 2019, the State charged Ware with Level 1 felony attempted 

murder and Level 3 felony aggravated battery. His two-day bench trial started 

on January 21, 2020. In its memorandum and order, filed January 31, 2020, 

the trial court found that Taylor’s testimony was “credible and corroborated.” 

Mem. and Order p. 5. It found that Ware was in the car, fourteen shots were 

fired, that Ware fired two shots into Stenson’s window, and that he intended to 

kill. Id. at 3-6. As a result, the trial court found Ware guilty on both counts, 

but only entered judgment for attempted murder due to double jeopardy 

concerns. The trial court sentenced Ware to thirty years in prison and he now

appeals.

Discussion and Decision

[8] Ware argues that the State’s evidence at trial was insufficient to support his 

conviction; first, because the evidence does not prove that he fired at Stenson’s 

home, and second, because there was no proof that he had intent to kill. When 

reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, we “must 

consider only the probative evidence and reasonable inferences supporting the 

verdict.” Drane v. State, 867 N.E.2d 144, 146 (Ind. 2007). We will not reweigh

evidence or reassess witness credibility. Id. Instead, we affirm unless no 

reasonable factfinder could determine that each element of the crime was

proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Id. Even if reasonable people might 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-CR-1133 | October 23, 2020 Page 5 of 6

disagree, we cannot set aside the trial court’s findings. Durham v. State, 250 Ind. 

555, 560, 238 N.E.2d 9, 12 (Ind. 1968). 

[9] To find Ware guilty of attempted murder, the State was required to prove

beyond a reasonable doubt that he acted knowingly or intentionally to kill 

another human being and that his actions constituted a substantial step toward 

the commission of that crime. I.C. §§ 35-42-1; 35-41-5-1. 

I. Evidence Ware Fired a Gun

[10] Ware argues that the trial court “heap[ed] guesses upon speculation” in 

reaching the conclusion that Ware fired at Stenson’s home on January 14, 

2019. Appellant’s Brief p. 17. The court’s finding was based on the following 

evidence: Taylor believed Ware fired a gun, because she heard gunshots near 

her ear; she thus believed those shots were fired from inside Berry’s car, unlike 

the shots Williams fired over the car; Taylor saw two guns in the backseat (a 

handgun in Williams’s lap and a long gun resting on the seat between the two 

men); Ware told Taylor not to mention the incident to anyone; the forensic 

report on the audio recording of the shooting indicated that two shots sounded 

different than the other twelve recorded, which could indicate that a second 

weapon was fired; and the two 9mm casings found in the backseat of Berry’s 

car were not fired from the gun traced to Williams that fired the other twelve 

shots. Mem. and Order p. 4-5. The trial court found Taylor’s testimony 

credible and the forensic evidence convincing. Id at 5. A reasonable factfinder 

could infer from this evidence that Ware fired a gun.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 20A-CR-1133 | October 23, 2020 Page 6 of 6

II. Evidence of Intent to Kill

[11] Additionally, there is sufficient evidence to find that Ware had the requisite 

intent to commit attempted murder. “The intent to kill may be inferred from 

the deliberate use of a deadly weapon in a manner likely to cause death or 

serious injury. [Our Supreme Court] has found sufficient evidence for 

conviction when the evidence indicates that a weapon was fired in the direction 

of the victim.” Bethel v. State, 730 N.E.2d 1242, 1245 (Ind. 2000) (internal 

citations omitted). The surveillance video shows someone at Stenson’s 

window, repeatedly shifting the blinds. The physical evidence indicates the 

gunmen fired fourteen shots, at least thirteen of which struck near that window. 

If twelve of these shots were from the Smith & Wesson bearing Williams’ 

fingerprints, then a reasonable person could conclude that two of those shots 

were from the second gun fired by Ware. Altogether, this evidence is sufficient 

to prove that Ware shot at Abdullah as she hovered inside the home behind the 

window, and therefore Ware acted with the requisite intent to commit 

attempted murder.

[12] The evidence is sufficient to support the trial court’s findings. Finding no error, 

we affirm.

[13] The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Bailey, J., and Vaidik, J., concur.