Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 62A05-1710-CR-2315 | June 25, 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

Cara Schaefer Wieneke

Wieneke Law Office, LLC

Brooklyn, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE

Curtis T. Hill, Jr.

Attorney General of Indiana

Michael Gene Worden

Deputy Attorney General

Indianapolis, Indiana

I N T H E

COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Randal Lee Coalter,

Appellant-Defendant,

v.

State of Indiana,

Appellee-Plaintiff.

June 25, 2018

Court of Appeals Case No.

62A05-1710-CR-2315

Appeal from the Perry Circuit

Court

The Honorable Lucy Goffinet,

Judge

Trial Court Cause No.

62C01-1703-MR-192

Bradford, Judge.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 62A05-1710-CR-2315 | June 25, 2018 Page 2 of 5

Case Summary

[1] Following a jury trial, Randal Lee Coalter was found guilty of the murder of 

David Weedman. On appeal, Coalter challenges the sufficiency of the evidence 

to sustain his conviction. We affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

[2] Coalter and Michelle Dukes were involved in a long-term “off-and-on 

relationship.” Tr. Vol. III, p. 141. Both Coalter and Dukes knew Weedman 

and the three often spent time together at Weedman’s home in rural Perry 

County. 

[3] On the morning of March 1, the three were drinking alcohol and smoking 

methamphetamine at Weedman’s home. Later that day, Coalter and Dukes 

argued when Coalter accused Dukes of having sex with Weedman. At some 

point during the argument, Coalter hit Dukes in the mouth hard enough to give 

Dukes “a mouth full of blood[.]” Tr. Vol. III, p. 154. Dukes ran from the 

home and asked Weedman to take her home. Coalter, however, refused to 

allow Weedman to leave and forcibly pushed him back into the home. From 

outside the home, Dukes could hear Coalter screaming at Weedman saying 

“Motherf[*****]. I knew you was a lying motherf[*****]. I knew you lied.” 

Tr. Vol. III, p. 156.

[4] On March 4, 2017, Weedman’s body was found in his home, “in the back 

living room, laid on his chest on the floor, in a coagulated pool of blood.” Tr. 
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 62A05-1710-CR-2315 | June 25, 2018 Page 3 of 5

Vol. IV, p. 118. Perry County Sheriff’s Deputy Bradley Douglas observed that 

there “was a gun directly under his left hand.” Tr. Vol. IV, p. 118. Deputy 

Douglas also observed that Weedman “had started to discolorate in his facial 

region and it appeared that he had been there for quite a long time.” Tr. Vol. 

IV, p. 119. 

[5] Although the deputy coroner initially ruled the cause of death to be suicide, at 

some point, an autopsy was conducted by Dr. John Allen Heidingsfelder. 

During the autopsy, Dr. Heidingsfelder discovered an entrance wound “behind 

[Weedman’s] right ear.” Tr. Vol. VI, p. 168. Dr. Heidingsfelder opined that 

suicide was unlikely as it “would be kind of difficult to hold the gun in your left 

hand and shoot yourself in the right side of your head.” Tr. Vol. VI, p. 202. In 

light of oddities observed at the crime scene together with Dr. Heidingsfelder’s 

report detailing the trajectory of the bullet through Weedman’s skull, 

investigating officers changed their initial findings and recharacterized 

Weedman’s death as a homicide. 

[6] After Coalter and Dukes learned of Weedman’s death, Coalter repeatedly 

instructed Dukes to “stick to the story. [Dukes] went this way and he went this 

way and [Weedman] was holding [his dog].” Tr. Vol. III, p. 172. At some 

point during the week following the discovery of Weedman’s body, Coalter told 

Dukes “Yes, I did it. I killed [Weedman]. I told you I’d kill over you, and I’ll 

do it again.” Tr. Vol. III, p. 174. Coalter also admitted to Cierra Austin that he 

had killed Weedman. Coalter told Austin that after killing Weedman, he “put 

the gun in [Weedman’s] hand.” Tr. Vol. VI, p. 110.
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 62A05-1710-CR-2315 | June 25, 2018 Page 4 of 5

[7] On March 21, 2017, the State charged Coalter with murder. Coalter was found 

guilty following a jury trial. On September 8, 2017, the trial court sentenced 

Coalter to a sixty-year term of imprisonment. 

Discussion and Decision

[8] Coalter contends that the evidence is insufficient to sustain his murder 

conviction.

When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a 

conviction, appellate courts must consider only the probative 

evidence and reasonable inferences supporting the verdict. It is 

the fact-finder’s role, not that of appellate courts, to assess 

witness credibility and weigh the evidence to determine whether 

it is sufficient to support a conviction. To preserve this structure, 

when appellate courts are confronted with conflicting evidence, 

they must consider it most favorably to the trial court’s ruling. 

Appellate courts affirm the conviction unless no reasonable factfinder could find the elements of the crime proven beyond a 

reasonable doubt. It is therefore not necessary that the evidence 

overcome every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. The 

evidence is sufficient if an inference may reasonably be drawn 

from it to support the verdict.

Drane v. State, 867 N.E.2d 144, 146-47 (Ind. 2007) (citations, emphasis, and 

quotations omitted). “In essence, we assess only whether the verdict could be 

reached based on reasonable inferences that may be drawn from the evidence 

presented.” Baker v. State, 968 N.E.2d 227, 229 (Ind. 2012) (emphasis in 

original).
Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 62A05-1710-CR-2315 | June 25, 2018 Page 5 of 5

[9] Indiana Code section 35-42-1-1 provides that “[a] person who: (1) knowingly or 

intentionally kills another human being ... commits murder, a felony.” In 

charging Coalter, the State alleged that he knowingly or intentionally killed 

Weedman. Coalter argues on appeal that the Stated failed to present sufficient 

evidence to prove that he killed Weedman. We disagree.

[10] The evidence demonstrates that although investigators initially ruled 

Weedman’s cause of death to be suicide, they subsequently changed the cause 

of death to homicide. The evidence also demonstrates that Coalter engaged in 

a violent confrontation with both Dukes and Weedman just prior to 

Weedman’s death. Coalter was observed exiting the woods near Weedman’s 

home on the day of the murder. In addition, two different witnesses testified 

that Coalter told them that he killed Weedmean. The jury was in the best 

position to judge the credibility of the evidence and the witnesses, and we will 

not reassess the jury’s determination of credibility. See Stewart v. State, 768 

N.E.2d 433, 435 (Ind. 2002) (providing that upon review, appellate courts do 

not reweigh the evidence or assess the credibility of witnesses). The evidence 

presented during trial is sufficient to sustain Coalter’s conviction. Coalter’s

challenge on appeal amounts to an invitation for us to reweigh the evidence, 

which we will not do. See id.

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

Baker, J., and Kirsch, J., concur.