Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-334 | August 15, 2018 Page 1 of 5

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

Brian A. Karle

Ball Eggleston, PC

Lafayette, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE

Curtis T. Hill, Jr.

Attorney General of Indiana

Matthew B. Mackenzie

Deputy Attorney General

Indianapolis, Indiana

I N T H E

COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Wendell H. Lawson,

Appellant-Defendant,

v.

State of Indiana,

Appellee-Plaintiff

August 15, 2018

Court of Appeals Case No.

18A-CR-334

Appeal from the Marion Superior 

Court

The Honorable Jane Craney, 

Senior Judge

Trial Court Cause No.

49G06-1706-F5-24130

Baker, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-334 | August 15, 2018 Page 2 of 5

[1] Wendell Lawson appeals his conviction for Level 5 Felony Operating a Motor

Vehicle with Driving Privileges Forfeited for Life,1 arguing that the evidence is 

insufficient to support the conviction. Finding the evidence sufficient, we 

affirm.

Facts

[2] On June 29, 2017, emergency medical technicians, firefighters, and law 

enforcement officials responded to a dispatch regarding a vehicle stopped in the 

roadway on 18th Street in Indianapolis with a possibly unconscious male driver. 

Officials arrived to find a person, later identified as Lawson, in the driver’s seat 

of a vehicle that was stopped in the middle of the eastbound lane, with part of 

the vehicle sticking into a nearby parking lot. The vehicle’s engine was running 

and no one else was inside. One of the firemen turned the ignition off and left 

the keys in the ignition. After being roused by officials, Lawson informed a 

police officer that he had left a friend’s house on the east side of town and was 

on his way home. 

[3] On June 30, 2017, the State charged Lawson with Level 5 felony operating a 

motor vehicle with driving privileges forfeited for life. Following a January 31, 

2018, bench trial, the trial court found Lawson guilty as charged. The trial 

 

1

Ind. Code § 9-30-10-17(a)(1).
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-334 | August 15, 2018 Page 3 of 5

court sentenced Lawson to three years, with one year executed on home 

detention and two years suspended to probation. Lawson now appeals.

Discussion and Decision

[4] Lawson’s sole argument on appeal is that the evidence does not establish that 

he was operating the vehicle in which he was found. When reviewing the 

sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, we must consider only the 

probative evidence and reasonable inferences supporting the conviction and will 

neither assess witness credibility nor reweigh the evidence. Drane v. State, 867 

N.E.2d 144, 146 (Ind. 2007). We will affirm unless no reasonable factfinder 

could find the elements of the crime proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Id.

[5] To convict Lawson of the charged offense, the State was required to prove 

beyond a reasonable doubt that he operated a motor vehicle after his driving 

privileges had been forfeited for life. I.C. § 9-30-10-17(a)(1). He only contests 

whether the evidence establishes that he was operating the vehicle.

[6] The record reveals that Lawson was found alone in a vehicle that was stopped 

in the middle of an Indianapolis roadway. He was in the driver’s seat and the 

engine was running. He told responding officers that he was traveling from a 

friend’s house on the other side of town to his own residence; at no point did he 

say that anyone else had ever been in the vehicle with him. This evidence 

readily supports the trial court’s conclusion that Lawson was operating the 

vehicle.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-334 | August 15, 2018 Page 4 of 5

[7] Lawson points to evidence in the record that raises a question as to whether the 

vehicle’s engine was, indeed, running when officials responded to the scene. 

This, however, amounts to a request that we reweigh the evidence, which we 

decline to do.

[8] He also directs our attention to this Court’s opinion in Clark v. State, 611 N.E.2d 

181 (Ind. Ct. App. 1993), in support of his assertion that the evidence does not 

establish that he was operating the vehicle. In Clark, a law enforcement official 

discovered the defendant sleeping in a car at an apartment complex. Id. at 181. 

Clark was sitting in the driver’s seat, the engine was running, the car lights were 

on, and the transmission was in park. The car was sitting in a parking spot with 

the front end sticking into the roadway going through the apartment complex. 

Id. This Court found that because Clark’s vehicle “was parked in a parking 

space, however inartfully,” there was no evidence to support a conclusion that 

he had been operating the car. Id. at 182.

[9] In this case, in contrast, Lawson’s vehicle was stopped in the middle of the 

eastbound lane on 18th Street. The vehicle was “partially” in a nearby parking 

lot, “but mostly in the eastbound lane.” Tr. Vol. II p. 14. We find these facts 

easily distinguishable from Clark, in which the vehicle was located in a parking 

lot and was mostly in a parking spot. In this case, the vehicle was stopped in 

the middle of an Indianapolis road, the engine was running, and Lawson, who 

was alone in the vehicle, was in the driver’s seat and told officers he was on his 

way home from a friend’s house. We find this evidence sufficient to support the 

conviction.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 18A-CR-334 | August 15, 2018 Page 5 of 5

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

Bradford, J., and Brown, J., concur.